I Hate Dialysis Message Board
Off-Topic => Political Debates - Thick Skin Required for Entry => Topic started by: Charlie B53 on July 08, 2016, 05:11:31 AM
-
It sure looks like someone, or some small group, has declared War on the Dallas Cops.
If so, I didn't get the memo.
No way can I justify the killing, or wounding, of Cops in retaliation for anything that that INDIVIDUAL did not do.
These 'people' whomever they are, are attempting to display the greatest type of prejudice every. The very thing they are protesting about. Yet they fail to see the contradiction.
I don't know how to break this cycle. I am afraid it is not going to end well.
I am very glad that I do not live anywhere near any of the large cities.
-
Charlie B, I've been thinking that this is headed downhill at a quickening pace, too. I live in a suburb of Columbus, OH, and while not a huge city, C-bus is definitely urban and very diverse, with attitudes ranging across the spectrum that reflect those in major metro areas. I've noticed more and more people at work talking about getting their concealed carry permits, which I don't really recall being a "water cooler" topic in the past. This is a scary time. ???
-
OKay, if you don't want the cops to come and take care of business... don't call them. If you don't want to be pulled over for an unsafe tail light out then don't make it a "law" that having a tail light out is a moving violation.
This Black Lives Matter movement is BS. All lives matter. The president should have set that straight RIGHT NOW. But, he didn't. He criticized the cops earlier this week right away, yet last night he said "now, we don't have all the information". Really? We don't have all the information about the police doing "There Job" either. Freddie Gray? Didn't have all the information... did we and now no cops are being prosecuted. The "don't shoot hands up guy" The cop was let go AFTER we got all the information. WTF These guys are out doing their job protecting the public. They got called last week for a Domestic violence incidence. Ya, know what, don't call them unless you want them to take control of the situation. Are the people going to protest the cops losing their lives? Nope!
The cops stand and let the public have nasty signs about them and yelling at them and calling them pigs and such. Hell, I would say protesters are on their own from now on.
:twocents;
-
Black Lives Matter is NOT BS as long as Americans can't get it through their thick heads that indeed All Lives Matter.
When we get out of our bigotted ruts POC will not have to make a federal case of their rights because their rights (to life) will be a matter of course.
I'm a white old woman and I believe that Black Lives Matter AND the All Lives Matter. In this country it is open season for cops against people of color. And as long as there are guns everywhere there will continue to be conflagrations like what we have been seeing and will continue to see. It will be a long, hot summer. There may be a riot coming to a neighborhood like yours. And if will be justified. There is pressure building and it has to go somewhere.
-
It makes you pause and wonder - what happens if/when the time comes that officers decide not to respond to some calls? If an ambush is a real possibility, it might (??) make an individual think twice about responding as quickly as s/he would have 5 or 10 years ago. One of my co-workers is a former policeman, and he spends a lot of time gnashing his teeth at all of this. (He went from being a police officer to a school counselor - wanted to intervene with kids before they have run-ins with the law.)
This past winter, we were required to have active shooter training. Wow, it definitely makes you look differently at your surroundings. My mother's SO is a corrections officer, and he's taking us to the range this weekend. I've never shot anything before, so I'm a bit hesitant, but I know a lot of people do it for sport.
I may have mentioned in my intro that G is black. And I'm not. It makes for some interesting conversations at home, especially when these tragedies happen. ::)
-
Black Lives Matter is certainly NOT BS. This is a good metaphor:
"My personal interpretation of Black Lives Matter vs. All Lives Matter. Bob is sitting at the dinner table. Everyone else gets a plate of food except Bob. Bob says 'Bob Deserves Food.' Everyone at the table responds with 'Everyone Deserves Food' and continues eating. Although Everyone Deserves Food is a true statement, it does nothing to actually rectify the fact that BOB HAS NO FOOD!!"
Data supports that police brutality toward blacks far outweighs that towards whites. White privilege is very real, so real that most of us whites aren't even aware of it.
I feel incredibly sad for the state of our country.
Aleta
-
CharlieB53, you might want to consider changing the title of this discussion as it is inflammatory, not to mention untrue. That one man murdered white cops does not make it a "war", but is very much a tragedy.
The Black Lives Matter movement is not a call to tell people that ONLY black lives matter, rather, it is a REMINDER that black lives matter. Black lives have never mattered in this country. Our Founding Fathers certainly didn't believe that black lives mattered for anything other than their unpaid labor. Slavery is America's Original Sin, and God is still punishing us all.
The cops may stand and let people call them nasty names, but protest is a protected right under our Constitution, and part of a cop's duty is to keep the peace during said protests.
There are several things that can be done to begin to break the cycle, and I think the first thing that could be done is to look at how cops are trained. The cop that killed the man in the car sounded like he had panicked. Too many policemen/women are trained to believe that everyone is out to get them, and this mindset creates both panic and defensiveness. Pair those things with a gun, and there is trouble waiting to happen.
Another thing would be to put more cops on the streets and have them live in the neighborhood they patrol. I know this program is in effect in several places in the country, and perhaps it could be expanded to other parts and in other states.
I don't know how one goes about resolving racism and reviving struggling neighborhoods. Too many black men are either killed or are jailed, and this exacerbates the problems in a community that is already struggling with the scepter of broken families.
It is my understanding that the shooter in Dallas served in Afghanistan, so one has to wonder if PTSD or some other related disorder might be behind this.
It's all so sad, so very sad. There should be no "sides". You can support your local cops yet still see that there is a problem with how "justice" is unevenly dispensed.
-
Black Lives Matter is certainly NOT BS. This is a good metaphor:
"My personal interpretation of Black Lives Matter vs. All Lives Matter. Bob is sitting at the dinner table. Everyone else gets a plate of food except Bob. Bob says 'Bob Deserves Food.' Everyone at the table responds with 'Everyone Deserves Food' and continues eating. Although Everyone Deserves Food is a true statement, it does nothing to actually rectify the fact that BOB HAS NO FOOD!!"
Data supports that police brutality toward blacks far outweighs that towards whites. White privilege is very real, so real that most of us whites aren't even aware of it.
I feel incredibly sad for the state of our country.
Aleta
This.
-
Too many already has the misconception that this was the act of ONE shooter. On the contrary, once the lab reports come in and confirm the exact number of weapons involved.
I am willing to say four. We will see how far off I am.
Our news reporting is terribly biased. They spread the misinformation and make it appear as though Cops only kill Blacks, or maybe Hispanics. That is NOT the case. There are a number of White people shot and killed by Cops, we just do not hear about them near as much as if they were a minority.
The same as when a weapon owner uses his, or her, gun in self defense, killing an attacker. Very seldom is this broadcast. Yet it happens almost every week. And we do not hear it. Why? It does not suit those 'Ruling Elite' that wish to take ALL the guns away from law abiding citizens.
The 'Ruling Elite' are terribly afraid that one day the common citizen is going to revolt against the unjust laws we are having forced upon of , our homes, and businesses. It is the same old 'Taxation without Representation'. No matter how many calls and letters are sent in, Congress and the Senate pass laws THEY want, not necessarily what the People want.I hope Texas Governor is successful in calling a Constitutional Convention of the States. There are so many issues the States will overturn. All acts of Congress or Presidential Order NOT allowed by our Constitution.
-
Among many other things, cops need to be retrained. And not militarized--as is happening now.
But before they can be retrained, we need to have a discussion of the role a civilian police force plays in society-what is it we want police to be/do? A military force able to respond to hostage/mass shootings like Orlando? traffic rule enforcers? A revenue source for cities and towns? Enforcers of oppression? Or-keepers of the peace? Until we answer this we can't train/retrain them or know what to expect of them.
For me, personally, I find it very hard to deal with the world as it is these days. I am overwhelmed with a feeling of despair that makes me want to crawl back under the covers and never come out. And I can't even begin to imagine what it feels like to get through the day as a person of color in this backward, racism-stained society.
-
Among many other things, cops need to be retrained. And not militarized--as is happening now.
But before they can be retrained, we need to have a discussion of the role a civilian police force plays in society-what is it we want police to be/do? A military force able to respond to hostage/mass shootings like Orlando? traffic rule enforcers? A revenue source for cities and towns? Enforcers of oppression? Or-keepers of the peace? Until we answer this we can't train/retrain them or know what to expect of them.
For me, personally, I find it very hard to deal with the world as it is these days. I am overwhelmed with a feeling of despair that makes me want to crawl back under the covers and never come out. And I can't even begin to imagine what it feels like to get through the day as a person of color in this backward, racism-stained society.
Again, this.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q63GKKbBSgk
Some of you may have seen this already. Fox news item, an activist known for protesting police violencce took part in three simulations. He came away a changed man. I have no doubt that many others would as well.
After the news item the video goes into much greater detail what transpired.
It can be very difficult to make a decision in a split second. Do NOT be the cause for an Officer to have to make that decision.
-
Among many other things, cops need to be retrained. And not militarized--as is happening now.
But before they can be retrained, we need to have a discussion of the role a civilian police force plays in society-what is it we want police to be/do? A military force able to respond to hostage/mass shootings like Orlando? traffic rule enforcers? A revenue source for cities and towns? Enforcers of oppression? Or-keepers of the peace? Until we answer this we can't train/retrain them or know what to expect of them.
For me, personally, I find it very hard to deal with the world as it is these days. I am overwhelmed with a feeling of despair that makes me want to crawl back under the covers and never come out. And I can't even begin to imagine what it feels like to get through the day as a person of color in this backward, racism-stained society.
My sentiments exactly! Other countries have down a phenomenal job training their police forces to be peace-keepers. Here in the US our police forces are overly militarized. They see citizens of color as threats. This affects their reactions to what could otherwise be peaceful interactions.
I do not and will never condone snipers killing men in blue who are doing their jobs as happened in Dallas. I will also never condone police brutality against any law abiding citizen. Those are not exclusive. It is not an either/or attitude.
I, too, want to crawl under the covers today and forget all the hate and prejudice in the world. Why can't we live and let live and love and be loved?
Aleta
-
Not everyone is cut out to be a cop. The best example is the South Carolina cop who told a kid to get his wallet then shot him when he reached for it. Then there is the story of the New York cop who was scared and shot a unarmed civilian in a stairway. The best example is the New York Amadu Dialo case in which 4 New York cop shot down a guy reaching for his wallet. The failure there was the Police Departments. Policy was that for every rookie there had to be a veteran on a anti crime patrol. The precinct did not have enough veteran cops so against policy they sent out 4 rookies. Prior to patrol they were lectured a a new type of gun that was showing up in New York it was made to look like a wallet. The 4 rookies stopped the car and got out on the sidewalk. They should have stayed behind the car. When Amadu pulled out his wallet one officer stepped back off the sidewalk onto the street. When his foot hit the pavement he fire a round. Three cops then emptied there magazines into a innocent man. Did these cops commit a crime? No, they were just in over their heads, the NYPD was at fault because of trading issues and the breaking of policy. 5 million is the cost to NYC,. When we send troops into battle they are well trained in simulated combat made as realistic as it can be. Mistakes are made during training corrected and when they go into real combat they are prepared. Cops need the same type of training. The bad apples ans the quick trigger ones need to be weeded out. Plus the blue wall of protecting other police must go. The people need to be able to trust the police and the police need the people to ttust them. It sounds like the guy shot with his girl friend did nothing wrong. He was licensed to carry, told the cop and as he was reaching for his wallet got shot 4 times . Plus he sat in the car untended and bleeding for 10 minutes. Thee only thing the cops did was handcuff his girlfriend and put her un a squad car. Sad tale,one more multimillion dollar mistake.
-
I agree with Charlie. Bad people are shot everyday for bad things and only the people of color get the press.
Our PRESIDENT is of color. So boo hoo about being oppressed. Minorities get free this and free that and still have an excuse for staying where they want to be.
There have been over 3,000 deaths in Chicago in the past 8 years. Black on black deaths. Not a word! WAKE up, if there are more blacks in prison and in trouble with the law whose fault is that? Black cops arrest and may shoot a black person. But, we don't hear about that .... except for the Freddie Gray case.
It is racist to single out blacks to be special when it is in an unlawful act or violence. They don't get a pass.
An old pastor was shot here... He had some burglary problems to his plant nursery so one night he went out with his rifle and an unmarked cop was there and told him to put down his gun and he didn't and so he was shot dead. Never hit the national news. There were no protests. We all just felt bad.
So, it is the cops job to go keep the peace at a protest about what pigs they are and horrible killers and ass holes. Hummm there is just something wrong there. Make the Peace crop do it. LOL
You want your cake and eat it to. Reality check...
-
The problem is a lack of accountability. If I pull a gun on someone, no matter how justified, I can expect at minimum thousands in legal fees. If I drop the hammer on someone, and it's not 100% clean, I get prosecuted. Cops, on the other hand, get to say "oops" and they know that nothing will happen; any legal fees will be paid by the department or their union; and they even get paid while on leave during the investigation. If they are still upset by the episode, they can put in for a full pension based on PTSD.
For example, officer Paul Duncan in Framingham, MA accidentally shot Eurie Stamps (an elderly grandfather of the target of the warrant) in the neck with his EBR (AR15). The police withheld his name until required to disclose it by legal process (you or I would be afforded no such courtesy), and the DA was using phrases like "accident for which no criminal charges are appropriate" while promising an "impartial and fair investigation". He remains on duty. Around the same time, a kid in a neighboring town shot his friend with a BB gun by accident (the "accident" part was not disputed by the police) resulting in serious injury and he faced criminal charges because he did not have a badge and thus had no "ooops" card.
And, if a cop shoots a dog, there isn't even the whitewash of a so-called "investigation".
-
Our news reporting is terribly biased. They spread the misinformation and make it appear as though Cops only kill Blacks, or maybe Hispanics. That is NOT the case. There are a number of White people shot and killed by Cops, we just do not hear about them near as much as if they were a minority.
"police killed blacks at three times the rate of whites when adjusted for the populations where these shootings occurred. And although black men represent 6 percent of the U.S. population, they made up nearly 40 percent of those who were killed while unarmed." https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/final-tally-police-shot-and-killed-984-people-in-2015/2016/01/05/3ec7a404-b3c5-11e5-a76a-0b5145e8679a_story.html
The problem is a lack of accountability.
Lack of accountability is a HUGE problem. When that is allowed to go on and on, it creates a loss of trust in the system by the people. Leaves me scratching my head and wondering what ever happened to JUSTICE in this country?
-
Then go to school to be a Cop. Obviously you have to be outstanding to get in. I think you would probably have the same attitude. They are not going to waste their time talking to some thug.. Now, come on give us your gun. We can talk about this and it can all go away. NO... they send in a robot and blow him up. YES!
I was complaining to my boss one day that CED's got paid more and I did the same thing... He said then go to CED school and become one.
-
He said then go to CED school and become one.
It's called Harvard Business School.
-
He said then go to CED school and become one.
It's called Harvard Business School.
I wish, but I couldn't go for FREE.
-
There have been over 3,000 deaths in Chicago in the past 8 years. Black on black deaths. Not a word!
This is blatantly untrue, as is most of your post, but this in particular is just false.
Just because we have a mixed race president doesn't mean that people of color are suddenly no longer discriminated against or oppressed. How can you even think that? All you have to do is be human and have eyes and ears that function to understand this.
-
Considering the increasing occurrences of wrongful shootings and deaths, the protests and accompanying threats/violent acts, and the growing lack of trust between officers and the communities they serve, what can possibly draw good people to the profession? What's an incentive for the right kind of individuals to even apply to a police academy and make this a career? ???
-
M Mom, just as always if you don't want to think something is true ... you just don't. Head in the sand.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/ct-charting-chicagos-summer-homicides-shootings-infographic-20150904-htmlstory.html
And that is just 2015. I guess if you live in Chicago you might hear this on the news but mostly it is a pass.
I don't blame cops if they just don't answer calls in a part of town where they may have to use force. It isn't worth it to them.
Again, if you don't want someone shot or put in jail. Don't call the cops. If you do call the cops, then let them handle it and shut up.
-
I wish I had saved the article. Many years ago I read a study document listing the inteligence levels of those accepted for Police Academy. I was very surprised to learn that the top scoring applicants are immediately weeded out, NOT allowed in!
The reasoning being the more intelligent mind would become to 'bored' with the job and soon move on to private employment, wasting many tax dollars spent on the training.
So those very smart applicants are NOT allowed to become Cops!
Seems the 'Ruling Elite' prefer those they can more easily convince to do their bidding, whether it is actually Constitutionally valid, or not.
We have a saying in the Military. Ours is not to reason why, tis only to do and die.
We were not allowed to THINK. Only to act on the orders of the Superiors.
Sounds a lot like the Police force today, to some extent.
-
I wish, but I couldn't go for FREE.
You would have a hard time going at any price. The Harvard MBA admission committee is a gateway to "the club" where new grads get on the senior executive or investment banker track. The acceptance rate is about 6%, and 90% of those admitted attend (so the chances of a waitlist admission are slim).
I wish I had saved the article. Many years ago I read a study document listing the inteligence levels of those accepted for Police Academy. I was very surprised to learn that the top scoring applicants are immediately weeded out, NOT allowed in!
New London, CT for example: http://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/story?id=95836
-
It seems like our military is also "dummied down"... Pons.....
-
"When the poor come to understand that they are likely to be detained and fined for comically absurd crimes, it can't be a surprise to the police that their officers are viewed with increasing distrust. In this environment, running away from a cop is not an act of suspicion; it's common sense."
Police Shootings Won't Stop Unless We Also Stop Shaking Down Black People
The dangers of turning police officers into revenue generators.
In April, several days after North Charleston, South Carolina, police officer Michael Slager stopped Walter Scott for a busted taillight and then fatally shot him, the usual cable-news transmogrification of victim into superpredator ran into problems. The dash cam showed Scott being pulled over while traveling at a nerdy rate of speed, using his left turn signal to pull into a parking lot and having an amiable conversation with Slager until he realized he'd probably get popped for nonpayment of child support. At which point he bolted out of the car and hobbled off. Slager then shot him. Why didn't the cop just jog up and grab him? Calling what the obese 50-year-old Scott was doing "running" really stretches the bounds of literary license.
But maybe the question to ask is: Why did Scott run? The answer came when the New York Times revealed Scott to be a man of modest means trapped in an exhausting hamster wheel: He would get a low-paying job, make some child support payments, fall behind on them, get fined, miss a payment, get jailed for a few weeks, lose that job due to absence, and then start over at a lower-paying job. From all apparent evidence, he was a decent schlub trying to make things work in a system engineered to make his life miserable and recast his best efforts as criminal behavior.
Recently, two more deaths of African Americans that have blown up in the media follow a pattern similar to Scott's. Sandra Bland in Texas and Samuel DuBose in Cincinnati were each stopped for minor traffic infractions (failing to use turn signal, missing front license plate), followed by immediate escalation by the officer into rage, and then an official story that is obviously contradicted by the video (that the officer tried to "de-escalate" the tension with Bland; that the officer was dragged by DuBose's car). In both cases, the perpetrator of a minor traffic offense died.
When incidents of police violence come to light, the usual defense is that we should not tarnish all the good cops just because of "a few bad apples." No one can argue with that. But what is usually implied in that phrase is that the "bad" officers' intentions are malevolent—that they are morally corrupt and racist. And that may be true, but they are also bad in the job-performance sense. These men are crummy cops, sometimes profoundly so. Slager had a record for gratuitously using his Taser. Timothy Leohmann, who leapt from his car and instantly killed 12-year-old Tamir Rice, had been deemed "weepy" and unable to "emotionally function" by a supervisor at his previous PD job, who added: "I do not believe time, nor training, will be able to change or correct these deficiencies." Ferguson's Darren Wilson was also fired from his previous job—actually, the entire police force of Jennings, Missouri, was disbanded for being awful.
When you ask why such "bad" cops are nevertheless armed and allowed to patrol the streets, one begins to see that lurking beneath this violence is a fiscal menace: police departments forced to assist city officials in raising revenue, in many cases funding their own salaries—redirecting the very concept of keeping the peace into underwriting the budget.
We saw a glimpse of this when the Justice Department released its report on Ferguson in March. In his statement, then-Attorney General Eric Holder referenced a lady in town whose life sounded Walter Scott-like. She had received two parking tickets totaling $151. Her efforts to pay those fines fell so behind that she eventually paid out more than $500. At one point, she was jailed for nonpayment and—eight years later—still owes $541 in accrued fees.
The judge largely responsible for the extraction of these fees from Ferguson's poor, Ronald J. Brockmeyer, owed $172,646 in back taxes, a sum orders of magnitude greater than any late fine coming before his bench. Even as he was jailing black ladies for parking tickets, Brockmeyer was allegedly erasing citations for white Ferguson residents who happened to be his friends. After the report's publication, he resigned so that Ferguson could "begin its healing process."
When you ask why such "bad" cops are armed and allowed to patrol the streets, one begins to see that lurking beneath this violence is a fiscal menace.
But consider: In 2010, this collaboration between the Ferguson police and the courts generated $1.4 million in income for the city. This year, they will more than double that amount—$3.1 million—providing nearly a quarter of the city's $13 million budget, almost all of it extracted from its poorest African American citizens.
Evidence also suggests that this new form of raising revenue—policiteering?—goes far beyond Ferguson. Remember the recent Oklahoma case involving Robert Bates, a 73-year-old millionaire insurance broker with scant law enforcement background who was allowed to go out on patrol—likely because he had donated lots of money and equipment to the local sheriff's office? He killed an unarmed black suspect when he grabbed his gun instead of his Taser. In the days that followed, we learned that other deputies had long resented this guy's freelance incompetence.
"Essentially, these small towns in urban areas have municipal infrastructure that can't be supported by the tax base, and so they ticket everything in sight to keep the town functioning," said William Maurer, a lawyer with the Institute for Justice who has been studying the sudden rise in "nontraffic-related fines."
Take the St. Louis suburb of Pagedale, where, among other Norman Rockwell-worthy features deemed illegal, "you can't have a hedge more than three feet high," Maurer says. "You can't have a basketball hoop or a wading pool in front of a house. You can't have a dish antenna on the front of your house. You can't walk on the roadway if there is a sidewalk, and if there is not a sidewalk, they must walk on the left side of the roadway. They must walk on the right of the crosswalk. They can't conduct a barbecue in the front yard and can't have an alcoholic beverage within 150 feet of a barbecue. Kids cannot play in the street. They also have restrictions against pants being worn below the waist in public. Cars must be within 500 feet of a lamp or a source of illumination during nighttime hours. Blinds must be neatly hung in respectable appearance, properly maintained, and in a state of good repair."
Where did this Kafkaesque laundry list come from? Maurer explains that in 2010, Missouri passed a law that capped the amount of city revenue that any agency could generate from traffic stops. The intent was to limit small-town speed traps, but the unintentional consequences are now clear: Pagedale saw a 495 percent increase in nontraffic-related arrests. "In Frontenac, the increase was 364 percent," Maurer says. "In Lakeshire, it was 209 percent."
It is probably no coincidence that when you examine the recent rash of police killings, you find that the offenses the victims were initially stopped for were preposterously minor.
This racket now has many variants. South Carolina hosts "Operation Rolling Thunder," an annual dragnet in which 21 different law enforcement agencies swarm stretches of I-85 and I-26 in the name of catching drug dealers. In 2013, this law enforcement Bonnaroo netted 1,300 traffic citations and 300 speeding tickets. But after everyone had paid up, the operation boasted exactly one felony conviction.
A different strategy in San Diego simply tacks on various fees to an existing fine. A 2012 Union Tribune investigation revealed that while speeding is a simple $35 fine, other government agencies can tack on as many as 10 other surcharges, including: a state penalty assessment, $40; county penalty assessment, $36; court construction, $20; state surcharge, $8; DNA identification, $16; criminal conviction fee, $35; court operations, $40; emergency medical air transportation penalty, $4; and night court, $1. When it's all said and done, that $35 ticket comes to $235.
Another report released earlier this year connects the dots: African Americans and Latinos make up less than a third of San Diego's population but represent 64.5 percent of those searched during a traffic stop.
There is still no comprehensive study to determine just how many cities pay their bills by indenturing the poor, but it is probably no coincidence that when you examine the recent rash of police killings, you find that the offenses they were initially stopped for were preposterously minor. Bland's lane change signal, DuBose's missing plate. Walter Scott had that busted taillight—which, we all later learned, is not even a crime in South Carolina. Eric Garner was selling loose cigarettes. When Darren Wilson was called to look into a robbery, the reason he initially stopped Michael Brown was for walking in the street—in Ferguson, an illegal act according to Section 44-344 of the local code. Between 2011 and 2013, 95 percent of the perpetrators of this atrocity were African American, meaning that "walking while black" is not a punch line. It is a crime.
And not just a crime, but a crime that comes with fines that are strictly enforced. In 2014, Ferguson's bottom-line-driven police force issued 16,000 arrest warrants to three-fourths of the town's total population of 21,000. Stop and think about that for a moment: In Ferguson, 75 percent of all residents had active outstanding arrest warrants. Most of the entire city was a virtual plantation of indentured revenue producers.
Back in Pagedale, St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter Jennifer Mann recently calculated a 500 percent increase in petty fines over the last five years. "Pagedale handed out 2,255 citations for these types of offenses last year," Mann wrote, "or nearly two per household."
"Once the system is primed for maximizing revenue—starting with fines and fine enforcement," Holder said apropos Ferguson, "the city relies on the police force to serve, essentially, as a collection agency for the municipal court rather than a law enforcement entity."
In Alabama, a circuit court judge, Hub Harrington, wrote a blistering opinion three years ago asserting that the Shelby County Jail had become a kind of "debtors' prison" and that the court system had devolved into a "judicially sanctioned extortion racket." This pattern leads to a cruel paradox: One arm of the state is paying a large sum to lock up a person who can't pay a small sum owed to a different arm of the state. The result? Bigger state deficits. As the director of the Brennan Center's Justice Program put it, "Having taxpayers foot a bill of $4,000 to incarcerate a man who owes the state $745 or a woman who owes a predatory lender $425 and removing them from the job force makes sense in no reasonable world."
When the poor come to understand that they are likely to be detained and fined for comically absurd crimes, it can't be a surprise to the police that their officers are viewed with increasing distrust. In this environment, running away from a cop is not an act of suspicion; it's common sense.
Cops like to talk about "good police." They say, "That guy is good police"—a top compliment, by which they mean cool under the pressure of the street and cunning at getting people to give up the details of a crime. Good police look bad when sharing the street with crummy police. But when budgetary whims replace peacekeeping as the central motivation of law enforcement, who is more likely to write up more tickets, the good cop or the crummy one? When the mission of the entire department shifts from "protect and serve" to "punish and profit," then just what constitutes good police?
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/police-shootings-traffic-stops-excessive-fines
-
I would think that if every police shooting was brought to light it would be an even playing field. But, only the black people who get shot, by white people are on the news.
As I said above, when Pastor Creach was shot dead by a cop in an unmarked car. It was not on the National News and if it was it was a blip. For the sake of MMom so I'm not a "liar" http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/aug/27/valley-officer-kills-pastor-at-nursery/
Was this a bad cop? Yes, and got fired a few years later for misusing his patrol car.
Yes, there are bad cops, but it is not JUST because of race. If it seems that way it is because of the Media.
White cop kills white Pastor.... not worth reporting
Black cop kills black drug dealer... not worth reporting.
Black cop kills white drug dealer... not worth reporting
White cop kills balck drug dealer father of 7.... OMG here is a big story
-
The Mother Jones article is spot on, spelling out many of the problems found in policing today.
Just this week in a locality near St Louis a woman was arrested, taken to the station, released 30 minutes later, for not clelaning up and mowing her YARD. Some city code enforcement officer had called the cop and had the lady arrested, not just given a ticket, arrested, cuffed, and taken in. LEAVING her FIVE CHILDREN at home alone!
Oh, but it's OK, the code enforcement officer stayed in his car there until she returned. BS
Son told me about a speeding ticket from the very small town near here. So small there isn't any traffic lights, not even a red blinking one. The ONLY blinking lights in the 'city' are on the school zone signs.
Anyway, he went to Court, the Officer failed to appear. Instead of dismissing the charge the Judge told my son that he would carry it over, schedule another hearing, or he could pay the $15 fine. He chose the fine. When he went to pay it he found out there was a $50 Court appearance fee added on.
I would have asked for immediate dismissal. If the Judge didn't dismiss I would have gone to the next hearing and moved for dismissal on Constitutional grounds. Had a Lawyer with me, then filed suit for damages, violation of civil rights, the whole bit. I would seriously screw over the little cities budget.
Edit: I hope it's OK to edit. I forgot to mention, I've a long history of being an A-hole. Especially to authority mis-used. Everyone has a Superior, you just have to take your complaints high enough that someone will listen and DO something about it. Knowing how to use the system to make waves is critical. Arguing with a cop will only get you in handcuffs, it is NOT the way.
-
Realize the Minneapolis victim was stopped 52 times in the last several years for minor traffic offenses, the stop that lead to the shooting was for a tail,light out. The poor guy did every thing right. Told the cop he was armed and was licensed for a concealed weapon. Went for his wallet and got shot 4 times, was left in the car bleeding to death while two cops handcuffed his girl friend and put her in a patrol car. I don't think the cop committed a crime, I just think he is in the wrong line of work. He reacted to the site of a gum he had been told about. Then he gunned down a pillar of his community. I don't always think the cops are wrong, but there have been 5 or 6 incidents that have crossed the line in the last year.
-
I do not know what happens, but there are some other reports that the driver had the gun on his thigh, not holstered, and that nobody has been able to locate a concealed weapons permit for this individual. Remember, the actual truth is often more complex than the initial news reports lead one to believe, and the narrative provided was from his girlfriend.
That being said, I would be extra careful if I was carrying while black.
Anyway, he went to Court, the Officer failed to appear. Instead of dismissing the charge the Judge told my son that he would carry it over, schedule another hearing, or he could pay the $15 fine. He chose the fine. When he went to pay it he found out there was a $50 Court appearance fee added on.
The deal in MA is more interesting (and upheld by the Supreme Marsupial, er Judicial, Court). If you want to confront your accuser in a traffic violation case, you pay $75 in advance - and no, it is not refunded if you are found not responsible for the infraction.
-
The girlfriend of the guy shot posted earlier that week..... her smoking pot with the daughter in the back seat. Are these the pillars of the community we are talking about?
We are all people and we need to get along. I blame the Media for causing strife.... and social Media. They censor what else is going on everyday around us.
-
Here's an interesting video entitled, "What To Do When You Get Pulled Over" by a country singer named Coffey Anderson.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpcxN9JsoN8
:beer1;
-
Wonderful Zach, thanx for sharing
:2thumbsup;
Love, Cas
-
:thumbup; Ditto, Zach. Very good life-saving video.
-
Newt Gingrich had some interesting comments about race:
Atlanta Journal Constitution
http://politics.blog.ajc.com/2016/07/08/newt-gingrich-white-americans-dont-understand-being-black-in-america/
July 8, 2016
“It took me a long time, and a number of people talking to me through the years to get a sense of this. If you are a normal white American, the truth is you don’t understand being black in America and you instinctively under-estimate the level of discrimination and the level of additional risk.”
For his complete Facebook video discussion:
https://www.facebook.com/newtgingrich/videos/10154285798134197/
:beer1;
-
That, coming from not-bleeding-heart Gingrich, says a lot.
-
“My favorite poet was Aeschylus. And he once wrote, ‘And even in our sleep pain that cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart, and in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God.’ What we need in the United States is not division. What we need in the United States is not hatred. What we need in the United States is not violence and lawlessness but is love and wisdom and compassion toward one another and a feeling of justice toward those who still suffer in our country, whether they be white or whether they be black.”
Robert F. Kennedy on the night Martin Luther King was assassinated and 2 months before he himself was killed.
-
I have a major problem with the video on what to do if pulled over. He is advising you to have your license, etc., on the dash BEFORE the Cop approaches the vehicle. This may seriously endanger your life. Activity in the vehicle prior to the stop is cause for great paranoia by the Cops. They are NOT thinking you are getting your license ready, they think you are either hiding something or getting a weapon.
My solution, and I have a hair over 30 speeding tickets, none in the last 30 years, and I AM Licensed Concealed Carry, and very often was. My solution was to tell the Officer that I am a CCW and I was carrying, my wallet was in my right hip pocket and I was unable to get it while sitting. I then asked permission to exit the vehicle, hands up and clear, then slowly making very sure he could see exactly what I was doing, withdrew my wallet. I did the same on those few occasions I was NOT carrying. Fortunately I was never shot, and I do not remember even having to hand over my weapon. It never left my holster. Over half my tickets were riding my Harley and my weapon was usually in plain sight.
I very rarely carry any longer. Only to go to the range.
-
I like Dallas Police Chief David Brown's suggestion to the protesters: "Join us" :police:
-
Interesting research article from the NY Times today. Harvard Professor of Economics (who happens to be a black man) studied the differences in use of force to see if there is a racial bias. The results are nuanced, but the issue of accountability (of the police) is highlighted.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot/surprising-new-evidence-shows-bias-in-police-use-of-force-but-not-in-shootings.html?utm_source=nextdraft&utm_medium=email
-
There are just more bad ass blacks then whites
Just like there are more bad ass MEN then Women
-
One of the problems uncovered in the aftermath of Ferguson , Missouri is that while the individual cop who shot Michael Brown did nothing wrong the Feruson PD used the Black Population as a revenue stream for years. Blacks were stopped frequently for petty reasons that were ignored in the white population and the tickets written on the Blacks generated a large portion of the city budget. It is no wonder that the Black citizens of Ferguson did not trust the PD justice department found the PD was shearing them like sheep.
-
Fortunately I was never shot, and I do not remember even having to hand over my weapon. It never left my holster. Over half my tickets were riding my Harley and my weapon was usually in plain sight.
The sad truth of the matter is that white or black can mean the difference between "I'll need to see your carry permit sir" and "on the ground mofo!!!".
I was once in a car of three white males while armed (we were coming from the shooting range), and the cop smelled gunpowder so he asked about weapons. Although two more cop cars came in with sirens on as backup, it was handled politely and professionally and I never felt endangered - and at the end the cop told us we were exercising our rights as Americans and that was a good thing.
I somehow don't think a car with three legally armed black males would get the same polite treatment.
I very rarely carry any longer. Only to go to the range.
I hope you do not live, or not live, to regret that decision.
-
I've had a gun pulled on me twice. First thought was "someone please call the police!"
-
I've had a gun pulled on me twice. First thought was "someone please call the police!"
I'll bet you are white. If you were black, you would be thinking "I hope these cops doni't shoot".
-
There was another tragedy in Michigan. This poor guy, probably didn't do nothin'. Was being transferred from one cell to another and grabbed the big bad bailiff's gun and killed 3 people. Then the Bad Po-Lice had to shoot him. Damn! Again and Again.
Why can't people just be bad and do what they want to and the damn Po-Lice leave them alone?
:sarcasm;
-
Trust me, my CCW Permit was always on TOP of my drivers license, registration, etc. One of the very last times I was pulled over I wasn't even carrying. On my Harley I the red light on the highway turned green and I sort of rolled on the throttle a bit hard, in three gears. The highway was going up a hill and my scooter can go UP a hill. lol Miles later, and I mean at least four, maybe five, the siren and lights can on. Of course I stopped, I always do even tho thare ain't a car on the road that could come anywhere near keeping up with my bike. It AIN'T stock, not at all. Anyway, I shut it off, stand up and look back at the approaching Officer and see not one, but TWO Officers. ANOTHER Officer is coming fast. This is when I turn to face the Second and tell him 'I am getting a piece of paper and a pen" using two fingers I carefully unzip the breast pocket on my black leather jacket. Of course it's black, and so are my leather pants. And boots, gloves. No helmet, as there was no helmet law then. And always my dark prescription sun glasses, LONG hair, long red beard. So I start writting down the time, place, and the ID Numbers of ALL the cars. and put it back in my pocket. It's obvious to the Officer what I am doing as I have to turn my head, lean, etc., to see these numbers on the cars. As I am putting away the paper the First officer comes back with my license and hands it to me, turns and starts to walk off. I have to ask, 'Whoa, just a minute, what is going on here? Why have you got me standing here and all these guys called out." He seemed indignant "You have to ask?" Well, yea. "I was sitting in the parking lot of the used car dealer on the corner at that light. I saw you go up the hill. You and I BOTH know you were doing well over the 55 speed limit but there is no why in hell this car can catch that bike and I don't have radar. Buy the time I got anywhere near you you were idling alone at the speed limit." I said, "oh, Take Care, Bye". And everyone went on their way.
6000 in third gear is somewhere around 120 - 130. I usually shift anywhere near 7 when I am seriously leaning on it. Blower motors don't know when to stop making power, they just keep pulling until something fails. 9 is safe on mine. It didn't take but a few seconds to go up the hill, it wasn't even a quarter mile, just a few blocks.
I won't detail the conversation I had later that morning with the Shift Sargent. You can be sure I made complaints about the number of men called out for a simple traffic stop, AND the Rookie that UN-snaps and UN-covers his weapon because he is so frightened to be confronting a PEACEFUL CCW Dis-abiled Veteran. I did not appreciate their stereotyping me simply by my appearance when they obviously KNEW who I was as I have had many many MANY contacts with almost every Officer in the County, INCLUDING ALL the Cities within the County.
-
Just ran into this froma link on another forum.
Live leak, Armed or un-armed, can you make the decision?
Not a pretty picture. But a real eye opener for those that don't have any idea how risky a Cops job can be.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e19_1468249664
-
There is no doubt that Cops have a tough job. I should add I come from a family with many cops in it. I firmly believe that a vast majority of Cops are good and try to help people. The problem is that the Cops maintain the blue wall and protect the bad apples in their job. Cops work best in a environment based on trust and mutual respect. The failure of the good cops to deal with the bad apples has lead to a erosion of trust in the police. I used to believe 99 percent of the problems were caused by the bad people in this world. Recent videos have changed my mind, I understand it's a high stress job but what's the excuse for the South Carolina Cop who shot the Black man down as he was running away from a traffic ticket. I also think that their will be accidents when ever guns are used and too often Cops are threatened with arrest when a accident occurs, all mistakes are not criminal but need to be resolved as a civil matter. This is why multi million dollar settlements are becoming common. However it is becoming apparent that the lack of accountability for the actions of the small number of bad cops has seriously eroded the trust in the system. Now instead of assuming the cops were right I want to see proof.
-
It has got to be even harder to be a cop in an open carry state. As the Dallas police chief said, they don't know which are the "good guys with a gun" and which are the "bad guys with a gun".
-
Trust me, my CCW Permit was always on TOP of my drivers license, registration, etc.
Mine are readily accessible (I need a bunch to cover the New England states), but positioned so they are never visible when I open my wallet. I know of a case where a driver in NY was hassled because the copy recognized the CT carry permit in his wallet when he opened it for his drivers license.
-
It really bothers me to learn of a VETERAN CCW holder that has done bad things. We Veterans often seem to hold to a much higher standard than many 'civilians'. So to hear of one of 'us' go sour, well, let's just say we expected better of him. Sad.
I can't speak for many Cops. I know very few, and most of them only in passing. But SOME of the Cops do seem to recognise the Honor and willingness of Veterans.
I am almost surprised at the life this thread has. The responses. It's likek I struck something, opened a channel that has needed attention for a long time.
This is my first appearance in 'Politics' as I tend to stay well away from both politics and Religion. People can get very wound very fast. I didn't expect this here, but sort of glad I did. Everyone needs to be heard.
-
I've had a gun pulled on me twice. First thought was "someone please call the police!"
I'll bet you are white. If you were black, you would be thinking "I hope these cops doni't shoot".
Doesn't matter. When things go south people are wanting the police. They've been there for me plenty of times. I was also taught to respect cops and if ever pulled over, to cooperate and be respectful. Color had nothing to do with that. Heck, I was taught not to even call them cops but to refer to them as police officers. Met some nices ones and not-so-nice ones. I've been written tickets, I've been "hassled", had one draw his gun on me by mistake and I've even been put in a police car. They may have feared me as much as I feared them in a situation. Never had a reason to hate them tho. My refrigerator door bares the namecard/businesscard of a SWAT member. It offers me a little comfort whenever the world seems too ugly because I know they are only a phonecall away.
-
PrimeTimer, color does matter. The statistics prove it. There are too many black people who fear the police so much that calling them in times of trouble is the last thing they would do. It's great that the police have been there for you plenty of times, but that is not the experience of every American.
Black youngsters are taught to be respectful, too, because their parents know that if they are not, they might get killed.
We have to understand that our own personal experiences with the police do not necessarily mirror the experiences of people who live in different circumstances, have a different color of skin, dress differently, or speak a different language. We have to look beyond the tips of our own noses and quit denying that people of non-white races see and experience interactions with police in a different way.
-
I happened upon this article written by John Gibbs. Additionally, I think a comment on Sheriff David Clarke's twitter said something similar; "Stop trying to fix the police, fix the ghetto". I think this is the same message Dallas Police Chief Dave Brown was trying to say when he told the protesters "join us, we're hiring".
http://thefederalist.com/2016/07/11/if-you-dont-want-police-to-shoot-you-dont-resist-arrest/
-
Richard Sherman from the Seattle Seahawks addresses 'black lives matter'
http://www.sbnation.com/lookit/2015/9/16/9340851/nfl-richard-sherman-seattle-seahawks-video-black-lives-matter
Take care of black on black murders first.
-
I prefer looking at this point of view. It's the system that is corrupt and it doesn't serve anyone--the public or the cops.
Others have written about the history of policing in the United States — especially in the South — and its roots in the slave patrol. So it should come as no great leap to consider that participating in policing in 21st century America could scar one’s soul.
This is not about being an apologist for the individuals responsible for the killing of black life. It is not about comparing the suffering of black communities to that of law enforcement. But in nonviolence, we know that if you don’t understand the perspective of those who you are in conflict with, you do not understand the conflict. You do not need to agree with, excuse or justify the other’s perspective, you simply need to understand it so you can see the complete picture.
And part of the picture looks like this: Cops are human. They work for an institution with historical ties to slavery and a long legacy of racism. They are indoctrinated in a culture of “us vs. them,” of doing “whatever is necessary so you get home,” of fear, distrust, and dehumanization of those deemed as being on “the other side.” They are taught to fear for their lives. They are trained almost exclusively in tactics of violence and repression. They are sent into situations of conflict every day with those limited tools, into communities where they are playing out tensions that have been brewing for hundreds of years.
Looking at that picture, no one should be surprised at incidents of police violence, and we should all understand that to some extent, it is rooted in the spiritual and emotional degradation that results from being immersed in such a violent institution.
I’ve been thinking lately about Eric Casebolt, the officer who responded to a call at a pool party in McKinney, Texas and proceeded to throw a young girl onto the ground and point his gun at other teenagers.
Casebolt should have been fired immediately, and his record should follow him everywhere, preventing him from ever having employment as a cop or even as a security guard.
If we look more into the history of that conflict, the story of Casebolt’s own trauma begins to emerge. The pool party was the third call that he attended to that day. His first was a suicide where he witnessed a man blow his head off in front of his family, and had to console the family. Immediately after, he was called to another attempted suicide, where he had to talk a young girl down from jumping off a ledge — also in front of her family. By the time he reached the pool party, he was an emotional wreck.
Again, that’s not to excuse his actions as an individual. But understanding that context and perspective also allows us to point our fingers at the larger culprit: a system of policing that didn’t care enough about Casebolt’s mental health that they couldn’t even give him the rest of the day off. A culture of machismo that doesn’t give space for cops like Casebolt to grieve or process what he just went through.
When the system comes together to defend cops like Casebolt, their defense of him is a smokescreen. The system doesn’t care about any individuals — the individuals are dispensable. It is trying to distract us from the fact that the system itself is corrupt. If the system truly cared about the people who work in the system, it would create fundamental changes to stop the killings of black people, thereby decreasing the chances of retaliatory killings like the ones in Dallas.
But for us, the more we focus our anger on the individual who pulled the trigger, the more we are letting the system off the hook. And the more the system defends the individual, the more we want to see him or her locked up, as if they are the problem. Hook, line and sinker.
Individual accountability requires healing, and a space for the perpetrator of the harm to feel remorse for their actions. I’ve learned over time that people can’t empathize with the pain that they caused until their own pain and story has been honored. So, can we build a movement that honors the pain of the officers, creates spaces to help them see the pain that they cause, and — following the example of former Baltimore officer Michael Wood — allows them to defect from a system that doesn’t serve them either?
And can we hold that level of compassion without pacifying our righteous indignation towards a system that doesn’t value human life? How do we build a fierce and powerful resistance movement that addresses the individual and the system? What does it look like to hold individuals accountable with compassion, and systems accountable with indignation?
#AltonSterling, #PhilandoCastile and #Dallas are sobering reminders that violent institutions are causing human death on all sides. And until we find justice for all people, their spirits will be with us, nudging us to answer those questions.
http://wagingnonviolence.org/feature/policing-isnt-working-for-cops-either/
-
It is like saying cigarettes kill more men then women. And blaming the doctors for their lung cancer diagnosis. When in fact more men smoke them than women do.
If there are more blacks in trouble and in jail....? Well, use your deductive reasoning.... We pay the police to protect us from the bad. Do we really want them coming to a convenience store robbery in progress and see the robbers and LEAVE because they are oppressed and don't know better? Really?
Is that what BLM is protesting about? Just leave us the hell alone?
-
We pay the police to protect us from the bad.
... Unfortunately, I am not overly sure about that anymore ... Here in London we have almost lost faith in the police ... and whenever there is a "headline" case, if Scotland Yard gets involved, there does not seem to be a chance to find out what actually happened and the culprit does not seem to be found either ... If I ever need some urgent investigation (hopefully never, touch wood!!!!), I would go straight to a private investigator because I am not sure I would have enough faith in Scotland Yard to help me ... Such is life... :(
-
For the majority of crimes, Policing as re-active, well after the fact. Although some crimes are solved the vast majority are not.
Crimes in progress, are met with violence. Sometimes far in excess of what may have been necessary. Granted, when a perp has a weapon out it is totally different.
But what about those 'other contacts'? The ones that start as a simple traffic stop and end up with the driver, or passenger, shot and killed. But for all those many cases where NO weapon was displayed, an Officer fires and claims he 'thought' he saw a weapon. That is enough for the 'System' to exonerate the killing of a person that most likely was NOT a threat.
These are the situations the Administration needs to address. Psych training and evaluations to determine those paranoid officers most likely to KILL innocent civilians need to be identified and REMOVED from public contact.
How do we bring about this type of change?
-
"[the law is] powerless to help you, not powerless to punish you" - Chief Wiggims
-
Who the hell is Chief Wiggims?
:urcrazy;
-
Head cop on the Simsons. The cop who shot the Cafeteria manager works for a department that patrols a mostly white city yet the number of police interactions with Blacks is very high. Most of the interactions are traffic stops. This is part of a broken window theory of policing. Stop the small crimes and you reduce the big ones. In this case the result is a part of the population that is black is just plain hassled in their daily travels. How often do the police stop you the Black Cafeteria Manager was stopped 52 times in the last 10 years that's every 2 months. What appears to have happened is the Cop want paying any attention to what was said to him, missed the statement that there was a license to carry involved, (for the record his family has produced the paper work and the Sherriff that signed it verified is was real.). Paniced when he saw the gun and shot down a guy in his car who was doing every thing right, people want to justify this by pointing out black on black crime, but the cops are there to protect all people not just the whites. I think any black male has reason to be terrified any time he has any interaction with a cop because there have been just to many mistaken, accidental shootings.
-
I think this article is good http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/07/black-lives-matter-and-white-backlash-ideology.html (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/07/black-lives-matter-and-white-backlash-ideology.html) It gives a strong rebultal to conservatives pointing to Black Lives Matter activists, President Obama, black crime in general, as being a larger problem then racism against African-Americans .
Racial disparities in law enforcement does not begin and end with unjust shootings ... in some zip codes if you are a black male, getting roughed up by police is a nearly universal experience. How many times would that have to happen to you before you were out protesting?
Donald Trump claimed that people - "some people" - called for a moment of silence for mass killer Micah Johnson, the blow'd up killer of five police officers. The first time anyone heard about a moment of silence for the killer was when Donald Trump brought it up. What the hell is this if not racial incitement? He's making statements completely fabricated for the sole purpose of inciting fear in the 30% of Americans supporting his candidacy.
At a speech today he said “The other night you had 11 cities potentially in a blow-up stage. Marches all over the United States—and tough marches. Anger. Hatred. Hatred! Started by a maniac! And some people ask for a moment of silence for him. For the killer!”
Read that again - he's saying the marches were for the killer. That the maniacs are marching. ... words are failing me , despicable, horrid, dangerous, evil ...
There is really only one person who is out of control since all the tragic events and he is the one who will be on center stage in Cleveland. It beggars belief.
-
Isn't this what they call, 'Political Spin'? Twist the truth and facts to support a position? And the general public falls for it every time.
-
Isn't this what they call, 'Political Spin'? Twist the truth and facts to support a position? And the general public falls for it every time.
This comment is called "denial"? And the general public falls for it every time.
This comment is also called "distraction from the issue at hand". And the general public falls for it every time, too.
-
Distraction from Crocked Hillary's lies.
:clap;
-
I wish I could be distracted from fraudulent Don the Con's lies and venom.
-
I wish I could be distracted from fraudulent Don the Con's lies and venom.
You can be certain - we will have a sleazy liar in the whitehouse next term no matter who wins. Ds and Rs tend to ignore the transgressions of the candidate on their side, but that does not make him/her any less sleazy.
I think any black male has reason to be terrified any time he has any interaction with a cop because there have been just to many mistaken, accidental shootings.
Absolutely. And, the black can be assured if he is shot it will either be "an accident for which criminal charges are not appropriate", or "justified based on a furtive movement".
Can you imagine a Trump/Gingrich ticket?
I'd like to see Grover Norquist in #2, but I don't think he is on the short list.
-
I wish I could be distracted from fraudulent Don the Con's lies and venom.
No chance of that. Donald Trump is a whiney little child who will never stop doing whatever he can to get attention.
Can you imagine a Trump/Gingrich ticket? It was Gingrich who single handedly ruined the political climate of this country. Older Congressional Republicans remember. But that's for another thread.
-
I wish I could be distracted from fraudulent Don the Con's lies and venom.
You can be certain - we will have a sleazy liar in the whitehouse next term no matter who wins. Ds and Rs tend to ignore the transgressions of the candidate on their side, but that does not make him/her any less sleazy.
I don't think anyone ignores any transgressions of these two candidates! How is that even possible unless you are living under a rock? Leaders of both of these parties are only all too cognizant of the baggage these two bring to the table.
-
You can be certain - we will have a sleazy liar in the whitehouse next term no matter who wins.
That's why I supported Bernie Sanders. One of the few politicians out there with any integrity.
Can you imagine a Trump/Gingrich ticket?
Some things just hurt my imagination. This is one of them. Two preening narcissists. One (or maybe both) also a sociopath. And possibly a sexual predator.
-
Do some investigation on Bill Clinton's years growing up (hint: His original last name wasn't Clinton) and you might understand why he does...what he does with women.
As far as the rest of this stuff...we're in a no win situation with the candidates at hand....and on this board, like everywhere else (Facebook and all other social media) you have people-some who have been friends forever-arguing about why their selection is better....like that's going to change anyone's mind. :banghead;
Here's a thought...let's all get along and maybe do this with everyone else! :grouphug;
-
Trump announced his running mate today. A Governor, but I already forgot which state and his name. Small laugh. As if I pay any attention to ANY of them.
Gov Nixon here in Missouri signed a bill into law limiting the % of income cities can make off of Police ticketing. Supposedly this will end the act of 'quotas' at the end of the month. I expect just the opposite. Police may just go on a rampage ticketing anyone and everyone all month long. Each City will just revise their budget, inflate it more so the % they are allowed from the tickets will be higher. The excess revenues from each city are to be credited into the State General Fund. Careful driving in Missouri from now on. Where the State Patrol have previously NOT been ticketing for 10 - 15 over on rural freeways, I am not counting on that any longer. I usually have my radar ON but I tend not to pay enough attention as there are so many false signals, purposely set out by the state to help control speeds, and it does make a difference to some. I need to start getting around earlier and slow down, a little.
-
I'm going to start speeding and driving crazy to see if I get pulled over OR ignored because I'm white with red hair and freckles.
Hummm :urcrazy;
-
Here is an interesting speech by Republican Senator Tim Scott on his experiences with law enforcement officers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmMQimrT8qk
This is the 2nd of 3 speeches he gave on the topic of law enforcement.
His first speech:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dx6rUw7t_O0
His third speech:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fikab1wCMvo
Edited: listing of speeches.
Regards,
--Zach
-
You going to sway the Cops attitude with your Feminine 'Charms'?
What if it's a Lady Cop?
-
I don't think anyone ignores any transgressions of these two candidates! How is that even possible unless you are living under a rock? Leaders of both of these parties are only all too cognizant of the baggage these two bring to the table.
People don't care about transgressions of candidates - they care about getting what they want.
Those who want a pro-FSA (Free Stuff Army); pro amnesty; anti-NRA government will support Clinton no matter how many times she lies, dodges indictment because of her connections; etc.
Those who want to stem the flow of proto-Democrats moving over the southern border; want a NRA member (not sure if he is a member, but Trump used his connections to get the almost impossible NYC carry permit); and don't want more of their assets transferred to the welfare crowd will vote Trump - no matter how many people he screwed over in borderline business deals or what he did to people using timeshare closing techniques to sell seats in his so-called "university".
It's about self interest; not dolling out justice by giving one of the most powerful positions in the world to someone based on their ethical purity.
You going to sway the Cops attitude with your Feminine 'Charms'?
What if it's a Lady Cop?
Think diversity.
-
Rerun, you would probably get pulled over, but because you are white and freckly, you probably would not get shot.
Simon Dog, by the FSA, no doubt you mean all of those red state voters who rely on federal benefits, right?
-
Simon Dog, by the FSA, no doubt you mean all of those red state voters who rely on federal benefits, right?
My definition is people who use EBT which are generally not benefits they have paid for. I don't count people who are using benefits they paid for (social security, medicare, disability, etc), Similarly I do not count people as FSA members because they drive on public roads or visit parks. FSA members frequently collect EBT money from the time they are infants until they start breeding and beyond.
-
FSA members frequently collect EBT money from the time they are infants until they start breeding and beyond.
Would you rather they starve? Or take to crime so as not to starve? If you were to fall on hard times (and it could happen to anyone) would you be happy to starve or would you become an EBT card-carrying member of the "FSA?"
-
FSA members frequently collect EBT money from the time they are infants until they start breeding and beyond.
Would you rather they starve? Or take to crime so as not to starve? If you were to fall on hard times (and it could happen to anyone) would you be happy to starve or would you become an EBT card-carrying member of the "FSA?"
My family collected "benefits" when I was a child. I'm thankful for by 40 bags health food (my parents choice) of rice, beans, powdered milk, oats, molasses and treats such as honey or nuts we were able to order for shipment to rule Alaska and pay for via food stamps.
I'm also thankful that I've had the opportunity to re-pay those "benefits" many times over via my federal taxes.
I travel a good bit and I'd much rather use my tax money to help the others than have them savaging in the street or selling their kidneys in order to survive. I'm happy I don't need to employ a guard to keep my home and car safe (that safety is part of my bundled payment of taxes). I don't see small children scurrying around the streets trying to beg or sell something so they can eat. I don't see beggars with grotesque side effects of the lack of healthcare.
-
FSA members frequently collect EBT money from the time they are infants until they start breeding and beyond.
Would you rather they starve? Or take to crime so as not to starve? If you were to fall on hard times (and it could happen to anyone) would you be happy to starve or would you become an EBT card-carrying member of the "FSA?"
Part of my definition (which I admit is not the right one) is FSA member is someone who never participates as a taxpayer in a meaningful way. I pay tens of thousands a year in taxes, and when I sold stock to buy my house, I had to write a check to the IRS for a bit over $100K. So no, I don't consider my self a freeloader, and I can never enter the realm of someone who never worked or paid taxes. In fact, I pay an "income penalty" on the Medicare rate because my wife and I make enough to be punished. As to dialysis - I am in the same category as someone who pays fire insurance for years and collects when his house burns down.
I would like to see mandatory work for EBT recipients. As it stands now, the differential between EBT payments and minimum wage is so small that it makes no sense to work. And yes, I would let someone who refuses to work (except who has an objectively verifiable medical condition preventing it) starve.
And, I would terminate Obamaphones (or whatever they are called) immediately.
-
And yes, I would let someone who refuses to work (except who has an objectively verifiable medical condition preventing it) starve.n.
How about the "objectively verifiable...condition" known as no jobs available, or lack of transportation or automation, or jobs outsourced to wherever, or lack of education, or lack of connections, or being too hungry to stay awake?
Be thankful that you earn enough to have to pay lots of taxes and have had the advantages that have made that possible.
-
How about the "objectively verifiable...condition" known as no jobs available, or lack of transportation or automation, or jobs outsourced to wherever, or lack of education, or lack of connections, or being too hungry to stay awake?
If no jobs are available, the govt can probably come up with something - even if it is picking up trash on the side of the road - in return for the EBT check.
-
As a person having lived in a country where 'mandatory work for EBT recipients is a reality, I can tell you that it's a dumb idea. It takes away paid jobs, and makes them into 'work for your benefits' jobs. Meaning free labour for employers, councils etc.
So more unemployment and a hell of a lot more unhappy people whom are not employers or just 'not thinking things through' people.
-
How about the "objectively verifiable...condition" known as no jobs available, or lack of transportation or automation, or jobs outsourced to wherever, or lack of education, or lack of connections, or being too hungry to stay awake?
If no jobs are available, the govt can probably come up with something - even if it is picking up trash on the side of the road - in return for the EBT check.
"The government can come up with something..." Well, you see, that's the problem. Congress doesn't want to spend money on work programs that would employ people so that maybe we can have decent roads and infrastructure. No, our current Congress would rather spend money on providing tax cuts for those who don't need them. All of the money spent on the Bengazi hearings could have gone to build a new school somewhere or could have been spent in some other meaningful way that would produce a concrete result (pun intended).
Another IHD thread that has veered off topic! :rofl;
-
"The government can come up with something..." Well, you see, that's the problem. Congress doesn't want to spend money on work programs that would employ people so that maybe we can have decent roads and infrastructure.
The WPA is an example of what I was thinking about. But, if the govt tried it now, all the unions would be demanding that those jobs be filled with skilled laborers at union wages, even if they were just holding a sign. In MA, it is illegal to pay less than union wages on a public works project ("prevailing wage" law), and a road work crew can be arrested (seriously) if it does not hire a police detail, about $50/hour, 4 hour minimum, to supervise.
-
I don't know about now, but while in the Army in Germany in the early 70's they had very little 'unemployment'. The German Government assigned people to work. They learned a trade, and they earned their benefits. Employers may have had the benefit of Government subsidized labor, but it wasn't free. An the person learned a trade. And often stayed with that employer long after the period of conscriptment.
I joined the Army while in High School on the delayed entry so I could graduate. I had a part time job in the fruit warehouses, but no way did I want to stay there a lifetime. Military has many advantages for anyone wanting to learn a skill besides using a weapon. Every branch has all the maint, supply, logistics, computers, fliglht schools for pilots of fixed wing and rotary, as well as all the ground support and mechanics for all types of craft. Navy, Air Force, you name it, it is available for anyone that wants to put forth some effort. And have meals, lodging and get paid during your term of enlistment. Not a bad deal for anyone serious about improving their future.
Why more young people refuse to take advantage of it I'll never understand.
If afraid of going to war, join the Air Forsce. Most of them are in very secure locations, most within the U.S.A.
-
If afraid of going to war, join the Air Forsce. Most of them are in very secure locations, most within the U.S.A.
This is why that branch of the service is also referred to as the "Chair Force" :rofl;
-
I joined the Army.
Dad and two Brothers in the Navy.
A Brother in the Air Force. Another in the Marines spent almost two full years in the DMZ in 70 and 71. To this day if fireworks start popping off without him knowing about it he starts digging a hole with his fingernails.
9 y.o. Grandson plays those stupid games and has an infatuation with guns of all kinds. I spin. He wants to grow up and join the Army. I get all bent and tell him B.S. If he joins anything he should join the Air Force. They have beer machines in the barracks alongside the soda machines. Or at least they did when I visited Brother on the Air base. We wer both in Germany at the same time stationed about 7 miles apart. Life was good.
-
Qwap! More Cops ambushed and killed in Baton Rouge, LA. When are these people going to realize this is NOT the way to promote good change?
This will bring about some changes, none of which 'these' people will like. Cops walking on eggshells ready to defend themselves is NOT how they should be. Far more are likely to get shot at the least provocation as paranoid Cops won't be likely to take much time to fully assess what may appear to be dangerous.
And I can't blame them a bit. I for one am glad I am not a Cop. I would want a lot more weapon than the hand gun they are issued. And I wouldn't want the M-16 I had in the Army either. It's way too light. There is a Company machining and making a 300 Win Mag that looks and handles much like that old M-16. Not fully auto of course. But with a round that size, weight, and speed it only takes one to knock anyone clear off their feet. And they won't be getting back up. If I ever have to shoot someone I do not want a minor flesh wound. I want to put them DOWN and KNOW that he will NOT be getting back up. Not when peoples lives are at stake.
If anyone is firing on Cops or innocent civilians, they immediately gave up any and all rights to continue breathing.
-
New York City PD has announced that all foot patrols will be two cops.
-
New Orleans PD has announced that police officers can no longer answer calls alone, must be 2 cops. They also reminded the public that since they are already short-staffed, there may be delays.
-
And I wouldn't want the M-16 I had in the Army either. It's way too light. There is a Company machining and making a 300 Win Mag that looks and handles much like that old M-16.
The age-old debate: lightweight vs. heavier and harder hitting.
Why not just go with the 300 blackout so you can use the same M16/AR15 platform, just a new barrel/bolt carrier group and mag (and possibly a tuned recoil spring and buffer)
-
You've already seen it? The Blackout is a very nice piece. Heavy enough but nowhere near as heavy as a 50, which is way overkill.
Things keep getting stupid in the cities and it wouldn't surprise me to find a few Officers trained and placed in strategic high places always on alert to provide and overlook during some functions. Sort of like the SS already does for some Government Officials.
As I am no threat, it wouldn't bother me.
I would hope they do use a frag/ceramic round so to prevent any pass-through shots or ricochets, either which could cause an innocent harm.
-
You've already seen it? The Blackout is a very nice piece. Heavy enough but nowhere near as heavy as a 50, which is way overkill.
I have not seen the 300 Blackout. Not being a high speed low drag type, I don't really worry about the finer points of ballistics. I think us dialysis types would be characterized as low speed high drag.
And yes, the 50 is overkill, but it's a blast shooting mine (BFG 50A from Serbu). I guess that makes me a Republican.
-
As I am no threat, it wouldn't bother me.
But would a police officer necessarily know that you are no threat?
-
But would a police officer necessarily know that you are no threat?
The military doctrine comes to mind:
1. Be courteous to all; friendly to none
2. Have a plan to kill everyone you meet
-
The military doctrine comes to mind:
1. Be courteous to all; friendly to none
2. Have a plan to kill everyone you meet
Is the Military Doctrine appropriate in a civilian setting if you are not a member of an occupying army? Or are you just being too clever by half? lol
-
Quote from: MooseMom on Today at 11:08:08 AM
But would a police officer necessarily know that you are no threat?
The military doctrine comes to mind:
1. Be courteous to all; friendly to none
2. Have a plan to kill everyone you meet
And that's a very big piece of the problem. There is a very high percentage of people who move from the military to the police force. And they come to their jobs with an implicit bias to see the population as enemies. Couple that with a lot of under treated mental imbalances, a basic authoritarian nature, a macho frame of mind, and an arsenal of military "toys" and you have the makings of the mess that we're in.
-
Quote from: MooseMom on Today at 11:08:08 AM
But would a police officer necessarily know that you are no threat?
The military doctrine comes to mind:
1. Be courteous to all; friendly to none
2. Have a plan to kill everyone you meet
And that's a very big piece of the problem. There is a very high percentage of people who move from the military to the police force. And they come to their jobs with an implicit bias to see the population as enemies. Couple that with a lot of under treated mental imbalances, a basic authoritarian nature, a macho frame of mind, and an arsenal of military "toys" and you have the makings of the mess that we're in.
That sort of scenario really sounds frightening !
-
There is a very high percentage of people who move from the military to the police force.
Here in MA (where cops frequently top $100K; much more in Boston and the state police) it is pretty much impossible to become a police officer without preference points on the exam. The common way for a non-diverse applicant to earn those extra points (to get over 100% on the civil service exam) is military service.
-
It's not the background but it's a training issue. The BLM thinks every thing is a crime. The best example is the Eric Gardener case from Staten Island. Cop was sent out to arrest Gardener and he put up a fight. Cop used a choke hold (which is against NYPD. Since its against policy the BLM wants the cop charged.
Problem is NYPD does not make law with its policy. Choke hold is not against state law, the worst the cop should get is being fired. I doubt a arbitrator would even allow that. The problem is the examples of killings like the South Carolina case where the cop just gunned down from behind a guy fleeing a traffic ticket.
-
Well, MM, I could try and get shot. When the cop said "step out of the car" I could say "I ain't gett'n out of my car for nobody"
When the cop said "Mamm STEP out of your car" I could look at him/her and say "FU PIG"
Maybe not shot but I would deserve to be TAZZZED!
When the cop says Get Out The Car..... ? Get Out The CAR!!!!
The third cop in the Freddy Gray case was let off today. They are trying to get them to just drop the case. All the public is doing is prejudging the cases before the facts are out. The cops are guilty and have to be proven innocent. That's not right.
-
It is the 'Kill or be killed' mindset that is the problem. Rather than use more non-lethal methods the 'militarized' police come in locked, loaded, and with the safety turned OFF, ready to kill, not incapacitate, kill. That is what they are taught. Fire for center of mass, which is the heart or within a couple of inches. Most likely to kill.
I couldn't tell you the number of drug raids, no knock warrants, where surprised people failed to immediately freeze, and even then some of those holding anything that could possibly be IMAGINED a weapon have been shot and killed. Only later was it learned they were raiding the WRONG house! Think that mattered to the dead? And all were ruled 'Good Shoot'. No charges against anyone.
But the Police attitude must change. No more covering up for each other. That itself should be a punishable crime as it is aiding and abetting a crime, if not actual conspiracy. Before they can effectively be accepted by the public they need to seriously begin to police themselves. And this whole paragraph needs to go national, if not world-wide.
And you can quote me if you like cause I'm willing to put my name on this!
Charlie B53
EDIT: Added last statement and signature - Charlie B53 - 7/19/16
-
Google "Eurie Stamps". He was shot while complying with a Framingham, MA police officer's order and the police do not dispute it was an accidental discharge. The fix was in from the beginning, with the ADA using terms like "accident for which no charges are appropriate" before the body was cold. The officer remains on duty.
Around the same time, a man shot his friend with a BB gun a couple of towns over by accident (this part was undisputed) and it penetrated his skull requiring surgery. Guess what? The mere fact that he shot someone by accident was sufficient to justify felony charges.
And don't even think of getting justice of a police officer shoots your dog.
The double standard fuels the mistrust.
-
There is Mistrust. Life is not Fair. You should mistrust authority.
Your Dad says be in by 10..... you better trust he is going to ground you if you are not in by 10 if you are a girl and maybe not ground you if you are a boy. That's life.
Your boss wants you there because dialysis starts at 5:30am and you are late. Your ass should be fired.
You don't show up late and not expect consequences!
If they say get out of the car and keep you hands in sight. You better follow directions. You don't mouth off.....
These kids who don't have a Dad at home or a strong Mom to set rules and have consequences grow up NEVER having respect for authority. Then they are surprised when they get shot?
We don't need to soften as a society because some are choosing to NOT teach their young to respect authority.
-
Rerun said:
If they say get out of the car and keep you hands in sight. You better follow directions. You don't mouth off.....
You completely fail to recognize all the cases where the victim was complying with police demands and was still shot. You pretend to understand the problem without recognizing the overwhelming bias against People of Color. We were pulled over in Massachusetts for a burned out tail light. We didn't even get a ticket - just a reminder to get it fixed. If we had been driving a clunker and black, I doubt we would have gotten the same treatment. THAT is white privilege and we have to recognize that we have it. Being poor and/or black should not be a crime.
Rerun YOU have white privilege, whether you want to recognize it or not. Your suggestion that if one simply follows directions, nothing bad will happen to you comes from your perspective of white privilege. You don't have to constantly worry about what might happen to you for the slightest perceived provocation.
Charlie B53 said:
It is the 'Kill or be killed' mindset that is the problem. Rather than use more non-lethal methods the 'militarized' police come in locked, loaded, and with the safety turned OFF, ready to kill, not incapacitate, kill. That is what they are taught. Fire for center of mass, which is the heart or within a couple of inches. Most likely to kill.
I couldn't tell you the number of drug raids, no knock warrants, where surprised people failed to immediately freeze, and even then some of those holding anything that could possibly be IMAGINED a weapon have been shot and killed. Only later was it learned they were raiding the WRONG house! Think that mattered to the dead? And all were ruled 'Good Shoot'. No charges against anyone.
But the Police attitude must change. No more covering up for each other. That itself should be a punishable crime as it is aiding and abetting a crime, if not actual conspiracy. Before they can effectively be accepted by the public they need to seriously begin to police themselves. And this whole paragraph needs to go national, if not world-wide.
And you can quote me if you like cause I'm willing to put my name on this!
Charlie B53
This is a succinct summary of the problem as it stands today. Without trust working in both directions, we aren't going to see much improvement.
This is a very complex issue that will need much education on all sides.
Aleta
-
White privilege means getting the benefit of the doubt.
-
Willow, you fail to follow the public media prejudgment through. Hands Up Don't Shoot never happened. It came out in court with black witnesses that he was trying to fight the cop for his gun and that is after robbing the convenience store and shoving the owner around. Justified! Maybe white privilege is treating the law with dignity and respect.
You fail to recognize cops shoot white guys too. Cops shoot more Men then Women. You don't see groups protesting Men's Lives Matter.
They are making this a big deal when it is on false premise.
Freddie Grey.... I bet all the cops get off (3 were black cops) Why? Because they were trying to arrest a bad ass and he was fighting back.
-
*yawn* This "war on cops" is an old Leftist political tactic used to stir the pot, create chaos and disorder and finally, to create sympathy and gain votes. It excites a lot of people but impresses no one. Heck, even Hillary Clinton's idol Saul Alinsky used it. It was born from the anti-American radical activist crowd and used by political hacks. Look how Bernardine Dohrn and Bill Ayers used it for their movement with the "Weather Underground". They killed cops. And they're white. This tactic has been around a long long time, it's nothing new. It is like an old worn out tire. It's re-tread. *yawn*
-
Freddie Grey.... I bet all the cops get off (3 were black cops) Why? Because they were trying to arrest a bad ass and he was fighting back.
Yeah, all that vigorous fighting bashing his head against the inside of the paddy wagon while he bounced around unsecured, and handcuffed.
-
*yawn* This "war on cops" is an old Leftist political tactic used to stir the pot, create chaos and disorder and finally, to create sympathy and gain votes. It excites a lot of people but impresses no one. Heck, even Hillary Clinton's idol Saul Alinsky used it. It was born from the anti-American radical activist crowd and used by political hacks. Look how Bernardine Dohrn and Bill Ayers used it for their movement with the "Weather Underground". They killed cops. And they're white. This tactic has been around a long long time, it's nothing new. It is like an old worn out tire. It's re-tread. *yawn*
I can't make head nor tail of all these very tired, uniniformed, irrelevant right wing talking points. Talk about "yawn!"
-
*yawn* This "war on cops" is an old Leftist political tactic used to stir the pot, create chaos and disorder and finally, to create sympathy and gain votes. It excites a lot of people but impresses no one. Heck, even Hillary Clinton's idol Saul Alinsky used it. It was born from the anti-American radical activist crowd and used by political hacks. Look how Bernardine Dohrn and Bill Ayers used it for their movement with the "Weather Underground". They killed cops. And they're white. This tactic has been around a long long time, it's nothing new. It is like an old worn out tire. It's re-tread. *yawn*
This...
-
Kansas City today, a Police Captain responded to a (?) domestic with a weapon IIRC. Some 20 minutes into the call he was shot dead. I've been out so don't/haven't heard the latest news.
It was pointed out KC had an Officer killed five months ago, shot.
-
*yawn* This "war on cops" is an old Leftist political tactic used to stir the pot, create chaos and disorder and finally, to create sympathy and gain votes. It excites a lot of people but impresses no one. Heck, even Hillary Clinton's idol Saul Alinsky used it. It was born from the anti-American radical activist crowd and used by political hacks. Look how Bernardine Dohrn and Bill Ayers used it for their movement with the "Weather Underground". They killed cops. And they're white. This tactic has been around a long long time, it's nothing new. It is like an old worn out tire. It's re-tread. *yawn*
Sort of how the right uses the menace of dark skinned people to rile up their base?
-
Willow, you fail to follow the public media prejudgment through. Hands Up Don't Shoot never happened. It came out in court with black witnesses that he was trying to fight the cop for his gun and that is after robbing the convenience store and shoving the owner around. Justified! Maybe white privilege is treating the law with dignity and respect.
You fail to recognize cops shoot white guys too. Cops shoot more Men then Women. You don't see groups protesting Men's Lives Matter.
They are making this a big deal when it is on false premise.
Freddie Grey.... I bet all the cops get off (3 were black cops) Why? Because they were trying to arrest a bad ass and he was fighting back.
Since I was talking about the general situation and you are talking about a specific, your argument doesn't hold up. Also, anecdotal evidence is not usually valid. You need to look at broad data. In an earlier post you stated that MORE whites than blacks are shot by police. While the raw numbers may give the impression that there is no bias, you have to understand that data. Blacks comprise a far smaller percentage (13.2%) of the population than whites. So, looking at the figure that 51% of people killed by the police are white, means that there is a huge skew (bias) toward black deaths at the hands of police. In other words, for there to be parity, only 13.2% of deaths by police should be blacks. Unfortunately the percentage is much, much higher than that.
Those against BLM conveniently and knowingly report data in a way to sucker susceptible mathematically challenged people into agreeing that black lives DON'T matter.
Aleta
-
Few seem to be able to reconcile two facts:
1. There is a greater chance of being shot; suspected of a crime; etc. when interacting with the police if you are black. As I've said before, in the case of gun owners it is "I need to see your carry permit sir" vs. "On the ground now!!!".
2. Some, but not all, of the shootings are justified. The one of the kid who had reportedly robbed a convenience store and resisted arrest and the Trayvon Martin case when he was bashing in the civilian shooter's skull on pavement come to mind. The BLM people seem unable to differentiate between a black who is victimized because he is profiled and one who gets a subcutaneous intramuscular injection of lead because he is engaging in criminal activity.
. So, looking at the figure that 51% of people killed by the police are white, means that there is a huge skew (bias) toward black deaths at the hands of police. In other words, for there to be parity, only 13.2% of deaths by police should be blacks.
There are only two mathematical explanations for this:
1. Police are more inclined to shoot blacks.
2. Blacks are more inclined (on a per-capita basis) to do things that cause police to shoot them.
The actual truth may be a combination of the two, however, the only "allowed" conclusion to #2 is that no particular race is statistically more likely to commit crime than any other race. An inability to look at all the facts from a cold statistical perspective makes rational analysis nearly impossible.
sp mod Cas
-
The actual truth may be a combination of the two, however, the only "allowed" conclusion to #2 is that no particular race is statistically more likely to commit crime than any other race. An inability to look at all the facts from a cold statistical perspective makes rational analysis nearly impossible.
sp mod Cas
It is indeed quite difficult to make any study of numbers un-biased as the simple selection of where the data is taken from can sometimes include bias.
The population % differs among not only small regions within a city but actually differs among the big cities. And varies widely among the outlying communities.
I've seen other studies attempt to juggle the numbers adjusting to get 'per capita rates'. No matter how you slice the pie, it isn't always perfectly the same.
To change perspective a bit, personal appearance. The simple fact of NOT having a shirt tucked in. Many people wear their T-shirt large, long, and hanging. This to an Officer is cause for suspicion as it is possible that person may be attempting to hide a weapon, and the Officer is amped up, FEAR sets in, this contact can go wrong at the slightest thing.
Same guy, different day, T-shirt tucked in. The Officer can clearly see there is no weapon tucked into his waistband. He is much more relaxed.
Initial appearances can make a HUGE difference in perception.
-
The hard truth is respect needs to be taught at home. These black guys need to marry the first baby mamma and stick with her and raise the child in a good moral home. Right now they have several baby mammas (their words not mine) and what is reaped is angry young men with no direction. Then they point the finger at white privilege.
Too many white men are starting to do the same. Moral decline will lead to future chaos.
-
Same guy, different day, T-shirt tucked in. The Officer can clearly see there is no weapon tucked into his waistband. He is much more relaxed.
This can bring an entire different set of problems to those who choose to legally carry a weapon.
-
At the time I CCW I lived in Seattle. ALWAYS wore at least a light jacket. Here in MO, that ain't happening. But now I live out in the sticks, every one is on at least 3 acres, surrounded by a bunch of old retired people, most everyone is always at home except for errands. Very ever will many neighbors be gone all at once. Not even for the Fair. Most every one are Vets and I don't of ANY home that doesn't have guns, both long, short, and shotguns.
Though we don't necessarily know each others names too many doors away we definitely know who drives what, AND what vehicles their visitors drive. So we pretty much know on site when a strange vehicle is nearby and tend to look a bit closer.
-
Did any of you hear about the black therapist who ran out into the street to try to calm his adult autistic clieny who had had a meltdown and had run out into the road? Someone called 911, and when he heard the police sirens, he laid on his back on the pavement with his arms up, but a cop shot him anyway. I had not seen this story on tv because it seems the media is Tromp obsessed, so i heard it from my husband who heard it on the radio. What words are left to explain away such a thins?
-
Did any of you hear about the black therapist who ran out into the street to try to calm his adult autistic clieny who had had a meltdown and had run out into the road? Someone called 911, and when he heard the police sirens, he laid on his back on the pavement with his arms up, but a cop shot him anyway. I had not seen this story on tv because it seems the media is Tromp obsessed, so i heard it from my husband who heard it on the radio. What words are left to explain away such a thins?
I don't watch TV but I've seen it a few times on my news feeds. Luckily the guy was not shot to kill and has a wound he will recover from.
-
Yes. This guy did everything right. And got shot in the leg. When he asked the cop why he shot him, the cop said "I don't know."
Not a satisfactory response in my book. The real answer was probably more like " because you're a big black scary dude and even though you are unarmed, luying on your back with your hands up, you people are violent."
-
Yes. This guy did everything right. And got shot in the leg. When he asked the cop why he shot him, the cop said "I don't know."
I think "I don't know" what a comment he heard one cop say to another.
It's almost certain this cop will dodge criminal charges or, if he is charged, get an outcome that does not burden him with a felony disability for life - a courtesy that would certainly not be extended to a civilian who shot someone on the "I don't know" basis. This impunity when shooting people is eroding trust in the police. Just look at the state trooper in MA who dodged "safe storage" charges for a gun left in his dresses (a conviction under state law would ban him from firearms possession for life) or the state trooper who shot a woman by mistake while hunting (who also dodged criminal prosecution). The immunity extends well beyond official on-duty acts.
-
This impunity when shooting people is eroding trust in the police. Just look at the state trooper in MA who dodged "safe storage" charges for a gun left in his dresses (a conviction under state law would ban him from firearms possession for life) or the state trooper who shot a woman by mistake while hunting (who also dodged criminal prosecution). The immunity extends well beyond official on-duty acts.
Losing trust not only with the Police, but with the legal system itself. Prosecutors and Judges failing to hold to a higher standard those entrusted to up hold the law.
Off-duty conduct getting a fre pass for offenses that would lock up any normal person is just wrong. Period.
Prosecutors and Judges involved need to be replaced. Many are elected positions and the voting public has a responsibility to get off their collective butts and vote. But far too many do not bother and the 'system' just keeps on it's merry way.
-
Prosecutors and Judges failing to hold to a higher standard those entrusted to up hold the law.
Really we just need to hold everyone to the same standard written into law.
-
Time after time we hear after any Officer shots an un-armed person 'I THOUGHT he had a gun'. 'I FEARED for my life'. And the Officer once again is not charged with the killing.
ANY civilian making the same claims would be quickly charged and convicted.
Why the huge difference? Officer training is fire first, ask questions later. Fire for center of mass, a killing shot.
Without actually SEEING a weapon.
Why are they not taught to shot a leg first, dropping the person onto the ground? If a weapon becomes apparent then fire center of mass. Very few persons are capable of firing any 'presumed' weapon while falling to the ground with a leg wound.
But NO, Police are taught to KILL, not to incapacitate.
Elected Prosecutors are the initial level of the problem. Even many cases where the Officer is rarely charged with a crime the Prosecutors presentation is often so skewed they jury fails to convict. Vote those Prosecutors out of office and get someone in that will seriously do the job.
-
Why are they not taught to shot a leg first, dropping the person onto the ground?
Wrong question. Why are they not taught to try to de-escalate the situation before reaching for deadly force? Cops in other countries, e.g. Finland, don't even carry weapons. I recall a fairly recent story of some off-duty Swedish police visiting NYC and intervening in a volatile situation and defusing the heat and tension and de-escalating the mess. Our cops shoot and then think--if they ever evan bother to do the latter.
-
I agree that it would be better if our police trainees were taught conflict de-escalation, but this is not Finland. No, it is the USA where folks can be armed and wander about with weapons. No wonder the cops are so quick to shoot. They can't read your mind or know if you have a gun hidden away somewhere.
One thing leads to another. When the Supreme Court interpreted the Second Amendment to mean that anyone can pretty much buy a gun anywhere at any time without being a part of a well regulated militia, the consequences are clear. The police have to assume that any one they stop may be armed and that a toy truck is probably really a gun. :urcrazy;
-
We are a nation of paranoid cowards-- the cops and the populace who tote guns for reasons other than hunting (which I also don't like) or living among wild animals. The lust for gunpower reflects a very distorted and cowardly core. It also shows a projection of our inner shadow (containing all the parts of ourselves that we'd rather deny and project onto others). If you see evil outside that you need to "protect" yourself from with a gun, it's time to look in the mirror.
Violence begets violence. Carrying around a weapon is an invitation to be visited by violence. And not just by cops.
-
Now this: http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news/local/violent-arrest-of-teacher-caught-on-video-officers/nr3W6/ Video
Officials are investigating an Austin police officer’s violent arrest of an African-American elementary school teacher who was twice thrown to the ground during a traffic stop for speeding and comments by a second officer who told her police are sometimes wary of blacks because of their “violent tendencies.”
-
That is so stupid. Honest to God! Look at France. That guy used a panel TRUCK. If we take away guns they will use knives, if we take away knives they will use forks. Get a grip!
It would be nice to be a love child hippy but then reality strikes. I'd like to live next to you and put a sign in my yard "I have a gun but my neighbor doesn't.... Guess who would get robbed?
Do you you eat meat? Well you shouldn't if you don't like animals killed. I really don't like it either but I'm of sound enough mind that I do know if I want a Hamburger a steer has to die. That is reality. You guys are not in touch with reality.
Why is it when a cop is called out and takes control and makes a mistake it is HIS/HER fault? Where is your peace loving society that the cop is even called in the first place.
A crazy guy runs into the street and sits down and refuses to move and yells to his caregiver SHUT-UP! Too bad the wrong guy got shot! Too bad we don't have palces to put those people who need mental help.
-
The sad part is the. Lawyer for the cop hinted he was trying to hit the autistic man and missed. Stupid and a bad shot a bad combination.
-
Too bad the wrong guy got shot!
Wrong guy? From what I have read this was a situation in which nobody should have got shot.
We have reached the point in society where not following the order of a cop, even if you are not posing a threat, calls for lethal force. This is problematic for the disabled who physically cannot comply; the deaf who cannot hear the police orders and the autistic who lack the mental capacity to understand the commands.
There is a chance the leg hit on the good guy was a result of a ricochet - rounds hitting a hard surface tend do not bounce back and an angle equal to the angle of incidence, but rather skim along the surface of the pavement.
-
There is a chance the leg hit on the good guy was a result of a ricochet - rounds hitting a hard surface tend do not bounce back and an angle equal to the angle of incidence, but rather skim along the surface of the pavement.
Yes, but there shouldn't have been a shot in the first place. Cops seem to have no ability to discern innocence from guilt, and seem to have only one response to practically everything. Shoot.
-
Yes, but there shouldn't have been a shot in the first place. Cops seem to have no ability to discern innocence from guilt, and seem to have only one response to practically everything. Shoot.
It is directly because of lack of accountability. Cops do not face the profound expense and risk to both career and liberty that civilians who shoot do.
What is even worse is the near impunity with which cops can shoot dogs.
-
So I'm hearing you all want cops to be babysitters. Show up and "de-escalate" "talk down" "calm down". Just like the classrooms, babysit and move on.
Another Terrorist attack in Germany. Just try and talk them down. It's okay. They are just having a poopy day.
:stressed;
-
So I'm hearing you all want cops to be babysitters
As usual, you misinterpret in the wildest and most global way. I want cops to "protect and serve" as they are mandated to. Hair trigger shooting and racial profiling with no accountability is not my definition of "Protect and Serve."
-
So I'm hearing you all want cops to be babysitters
As usual, you misinterpret in the wildest and most global way. I want cops to "protect and serve" as they are mandated to. Hair trigger shooting and racial profiling with no accountability is not my definition of "Protect and Serve."
Thank you.
And to another point, yes, in Nice the person used a truck to kill, but just imagine if it had been a truck with the driver ALSO shooting! And yes, those who wish to do harm can use a knife, but how many of the Sandy Hook children and teachers would still be alive if a knife had been used? Your arguments are simply not well supported, but just regurgitating the indoctrination of those who want our society to be heavily armed.
Aleta
-
I wonder who the policemen and women will vote for?
:cheer:
My nephew just turned 40 and is a Motorcycle State Trooper. There were about 30 WSP's at his party. Oh, and his girlfriend is a County Sheriff.
They are all voting for Trump. He has their backs. Just say'in. :cheer:
-
How many Sandy Hook little first graders would have been killed had the teachers and the staff been armed?
There is a reason they call schools and malls "soft targets". Look it up....
Protect and serve? They are human not fricken' Robots. Get your fat ass out there and protect and serve instead of criticize.
-
I have a problem with the Police attitude of authority, thinking they can 'Command' me to do anything. BS. I am NOT a criminal. Treat me like a person and I will respond like a person. Try to treat me like a criminal and I WILL tell you exactly what the law reads and how I WILL use it in Court to OWN a large portion of public money. Making it very likely that you will NOT be employed very long.
The Law allows an Officer to ask questions. It does NOT allow physical abuse such as throwing a person to the ground without 'Probable Cause'. Though the Courts do stretch the interpetation of PC there must be some evidence of 'reasonable suspicion' before the Officer can even begin any contact. Failing some of these simple tests the Officer is out of line and subject to Court action. Now here rises the problem, Prosecutors refuse to charge Officers with their crimes. So the only recourse we have is to gather our own 'evidence' most often in the form of video recording, and file civl suit for civil rights violations. Sue the individual Officer AND the Force, AND the City, County, State. When the Court attempts to excuse the individual OPfficer from the suit, object as if not for that individual there would be no suit.
Holding the individual responsible for their actions is the only way to begin to make these errant officers responsible. There really isn't that many bad Cops. They would soon catch on and seek other employment knowing their time is limited before some soul bankrupts them for their actions.
-
How many Sandy Hook little first graders would have been killed had the teachers and the staff been armed?
There is a reason they call schools and malls "soft targets". Look it up....
Protect and serve? They are human not fricken' Robots. Get your fat ass out there and protect and serve instead of criticize.
Rerun, I find it confusing and somewhat upsetting that you, as a moderator on this site have such an uncanny ability to be verbally abusive to others. As a retired teacher I would NEVER ever advocate for teachers to be armed, especially at the elementary or early childhood level.
I think a good analogy for this whole "everyone needs to be armed" stance is one from the school playground. If a kid has a rock and throws it at another kid injuring him, what is the logical response? It certainly isn't to give all the kids rocks. Nor is it to teach all the kids how to manage rocks. The logical response is to take THAT child at hand, remove any additional rocks from his possession and teach that violence is not acceptable. Arming all the kids because of one who acted outside the rules will not solve the problem.
Going back to the thrust of this thread, as Charlie B53 said,
Holding the individual responsible for their actions is the only way to begin to make these errant officers responsible. There really isn't that many bad Cops. They would soon catch on and seek other employment knowing their time is limited before some soul bankrupts them for their actions.
There needs to be better policing of behavior within the law enforcement ranks. The bad apples need to be removed. There needs to be better training and less militarization of our police forces. That would go a long way to restore trust.
Aleta
-
I'm not a moderator... AND it says Thick Skin for this section. If you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen.
We are not talking kids with guns. We are talking responsible adults that pass the screening. Talk about me jumping WAY out there. Sheesh.
There are bad apples in every job. Look at congress.
-
I'm not a moderator... AND it says Thick Skin for this section. If you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen.
We are not talking kids with guns. We are talking responsible adults that pass the screening. Talk about me jumping WAY out there. Sheesh.
There are bad apples in every job. Look at congress.
''
Pardon me. I should have said Administrator/Owner as your profile states. And yes, it does say that thick skin is required. I take that to mean that if one isn't prepared to argue the issue one should steer clear of the thread. I never took it to mean that participants had free reign to be insulting to other participants.
I maintain that putting guns into the hands of teachers is NOT a solution. Like you say, there are bad apples in every job and that includes teachers. Teachers are already overloaded with responsibility and underpaid for what they do. This would add to the responsibility, add to the number of training hours they would need, and detract from their attention to the real job they should be doing. Recipe for disaster.
Furthermore, I maintain that some (if not many) police officers aren't sufficiently trained to know when and where to use their firearms and that IS part of their jobs. If they can't get adequate training, how in the world do you propose that teachers can get adequate training when it is not, or should not be, part of their job description.
Arming everyone is simply NOT the answer.
I welcome thoughtful responses. responses like this add nothing to the argument and are off topic for the thread:
I wonder who the policemen and women will vote for?
:cheer:
My nephew just turned 40 and is a Motorcycle State Trooper. There were about 30 WSP's at his party. Oh, and his girlfriend is a County Sheriff.
They are all voting for Trump. He has their backs. Just say'in. :cheer:
Aleta
-
What screening the current Republican Congress won't even stop people on the Terrorist watch list from buying guns. When the second admendment was written state of art of fire arms was a single shot mussel loader. It would average a shot a minute. Plenty of time to run between shots. Noe you can buy a weapon that sprays bullets. This is insanity.
-
Just don't leave schools as a "soft target". That way teachers could carry if they wanted to. No extra training for the overworked already burdened teachers who are scared of guns. But, those who want to can. That leaves the mental case wondering .... hmmm they may be armed.
Alta you may want to read the topic of this... and then read the singled out post of mine again. :waving;
-
What screening the current Republican Congress won't even stop people on the Terrorist watch list from buying guns. When the second admendment was written state of art of fire arms was a single shot mussel loader. It would average a shot a minute. Plenty of time to run between shots. Noe you can buy a weapon that sprays bullets. This is insanity.
True, however, when the first amendment was written the state of art was movable type in a hand operated press. Today we have TV, radio and the internet. By your logic, this means the 1st amendment does not preclude the regulation of what kind of speech is allowed on the internet.
We also had only variants of Christian/Jewish sects when the first amendment was written. By your logic, this means that the government is free to ban any religions not established in the US at the time of the signing of the bill of rights (an argument Trump would find most convenient).
The real question is the 2nd amendment a "second class right" or one afforded all the protection of other rights?
Just don't leave schools as a "soft target". That way teachers could carry if they wanted to. No extra training for the overworked already burdened teachers who are scared of guns. But, those who want to can. That leaves the mental case wondering .... hmmm they may be armed.
Just try shooting up a school or day care in Israel and watch what happens. Though, the US being what it is, I'm sure the union would demand extra pay for those teachers who chose to carry.
Or, more practically, have AR15s in lockboxes accessible to trained school employees so they could run a counter force. Include a bright colored vest with each gun so the police could recognize them as "good guys" and keep the color code highly confidential (sealed packets opened only in emergency so even the teachers don't now the code in advance) so the bad guys don't use it. I'd even throw in a radio on the PD frequency.
Airline pilots already have secret "code words" that sound like normal conversation that are used to communicate messages like "commandos now!!!" when speaking with the tower at the point of a peaceful religious representative's gun, so the concept of pre-arranged signalling to LE is well established.
My wife noticed the irony of Hillary's running mate starting his diatribe about the gun problem with a story about when "my security detail told me that....". In other words, "guns for me but not for thee"
What screening the current Republican Congress won't even stop people on the Terrorist watch list from buying guns
It makes sense to keep guns out of the hands of terrorists, however, the removal of a constitutional right must be afforded due process. This means that the accused must have the right to refute all evidence used against him/her; confront witnesses used against him/her; compel witnesses to testify under oath; have hearsay evidence excluded in all but very limited cases; have an advocate argue on their behalf and lose the right only after a decision by an impartial finder of fact.
Imagine of the local PD could compile a "bad driver list", and have those persons drivers licenses revoked - no hearing before a judge; no right to see why you are on the list; and appeal limited to asking the police to reconsider their secret evidence. This is the standard those arguing the use of a secret list to remove a citizen's right are advocating.
Arming everyone is simply NOT the answer.
Agreed. Disarming everyone is also simply NOT the answer.
-
I have to admit that when I started this thread I had no idea of the responses it would bring. It seems this subject touch a nerve with many. There is no doubt that many of us agree that abuse of autority is a continuing problem. That there are some Cops that simply should NOT be Cops. Granted, Cops are human and humans make mistakes. And some of those mistakes can be fatl. What is disgraceful is the cover-up, ignoring the really abusive officers conduct, excusing outrageous behavior. In many cases when a particular officer is pointed out the Department simply allows them to resign, and free to go ahead and join another force in another city and continue abusing citizens.
Those practices need to STOP. The problem is getting Prosecutors and Judges to start doing their job and start charging and convicting those abusive officers. Other Officers need to STOP covering up for their abusive fellows.
If the Police fail to police themselves they will NEVER be trusted by the public.
-
If the Police fail to police themselves they will NEVER be trusted by the public.
This defines the problem. Police should not be policed by themselves, but by their employers (members of the public). The current system is rigged - the police investigate their buddies, and generally find no violation of law. If the prosecutor gets involved, great deference is given to the police to the point where there is an assumption of lawfulness in use of force, whereas, with civilians the assumption is reversed.
quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
-
It depends upon the city/town whether or not the police police themselves. Cities are, in fact, corporations, and as such they will have legal departments that handle police violations, knowing that residents can sue.
-
Through all my life I had many good experiences with police people... For example, when I first came to London and could not find my way
I often asked a policeman and they were always very sweet and helped me by either explaining or by bringing me by foot or by car to the address I needed to be ...
... I only ever had one bad experience with a policeman and that was when our car broke down in a very rough district in London and my husband went out to find a garage,
(that was before mobile telephones) whilst I stayed behind, sitting in our car, waiting.
... All of a sudden I was approached by two police people, one male and one female and both of them ordered me to open the car door.
... I refused because the male policeman appeared to be very showy and aggressive towards me and I did not approve of his behaviour
and adding to that he did not appear to be sober either and my instinct told me that I did not stand a chance against this unwanted aggeressive behaviour.
... So I stayed put and did not move in the locked car and adding to that I ignored all his aggressive attempts... At one point he even kicked his foot against the car door
and that was very frightening ... Fortunately the female police-member realized my distress about his overly showy aggression (no doubt he wanted to impress her)
and she kindly lured him away from our car and luckily my husband arrived shortly after and he had already arranged for our car to be towed away
by the AA (AA = The British motoring association founded in 1905 which provides car insurance, breakdown cover and many other services).
... I still believe I did the right thing by not opening our car door to this aggressive policeman because he was beyond the point
of conducting himself like a respectable police(gentle)man...
-
Quote
Arming everyone is simply NOT the answer.
Agreed. Disarming everyone is also simply NOT the answer.
Agreed! I find it interesting that when the topic turns to reasonable controls on gun sales/ownership/types of weapons allowed, those against any of the former start the chant about "taking away our guns!"
Sigh. Can't we find some common ground?
Aleta
-
Sigh. Can't we find some common ground?
Neither side seems to be willing to let it happen.
For example, gun control advocates never offer a true compromise that gives both sides something. I'd start with a compromise like universal background checks on all sales in return for shall-issue concealed carry permit licensing, national reciprocity (like driver's licenses), and not allowing places like NYC to limit carry permits to the privileged and connected. But, the gun control people always define compromise as "we won't take away as much as we wanted to....this time".
We just had the MA AG re-write the gun laws with a very creative re-interpretation, which means my legal team has work to do (yes, I really do have a legal team for this sort of thing, and it is rather well funded).
-
The very first question that should be asked any new police recruit,
Would you testify against a fellow Officer that you witnessed committing a criminally aggressive act?
If ANY Officer is not willing to testify to help get rid of the few bad Cops, then that Officer isn't worth wearing the Badge either.
If he is not part of the solution he is part of the problem.
Until these attitude change there will NEVER be any public confidence in Police.
-
What do you mean no compromise. Recently a attempt was made to stop people on the terror watch list from buying guns. The gun lobby and the republicans blocked the attempt because they seem to feel the 2 amendment allows terrorists to buy guns. Romberg the second admendment was written during the time when mussel loaders were the guns around not assault weapons. These weapons are designed to kill and maim large number of people. Can't we at least stop terrorists from buying them.
-
What do you mean no compromise. Recently a attempt was made to stop people on the terror watch list from buying guns. The gun lobby and the republicans blocked the attempt because they seem to feel the 2 amendment allows terrorists to buy guns. Romberg the second admendment was written during the time when mussel loaders were the guns around not assault weapons. These weapons are designed to kill and maim large number of people. Can't we at least stop terrorists from buying them.
I did not mean "no compromise" but "no unilateral surrender of rights". If something is taken, something else must be given. I'd start by adding more protections for the law-abiding when adding more restrictions. In any compromise, both sides feel they got something they wanted. One side only getting part of what it wants, and the other side getting nothing, it not a compromise. (Give me $20? No? Ok, give me $10 and we'll call it a compromise)
I favor banning terrorists from buying guns, but it should involve due process - specifically a court hearing before an impartial finder of fact where the alleged terrorist may confront evidence used against him, confront witnesses used against him, compel people to testify under oath via subpoena, have heresay evidence and rumor excluded, etc. Imagine if the police could revoke the drivers licenses of known drunk drivers, based on secret criteria and the only appeal was asking the police to reconsider.
As to "not in use at the time" - that argument was rejected by SCOTUS. If the argument were valid, it would be legal for congress to regulate speech on the internet because electronic communications did not exist when the 1st amendment was ratified. I doubt the framers of the bill of rights anticipated freedom of religion being used to protect a religion that supplies the majority of terrorists (most Muslims are not terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslims), but that does not exclude Islam from 1st amendment protection. Of courses, these arguments do not hold if one accepts the fact that the 2nd amendment is a "second class right" to be afforded less protection than the other 9 items in the bill of rights.
-
All right say I live next to you and I have always liked the thought of atomic bombs, and I am a smart idiot and I start to build one. It's a weapon and since it's not right to ban weapons of any type I build the damn thing. Biggest problem is the triggering device, so how do you feel with your neighbor going nuclear. Why not just because no one new about atomic bombs why should I be punished and my bomb seized. If not a atomic bomb say 2000'pounds of C4 want that next to you. Well those weapons are banned quite rightly and I feel any weapon not in use during the 18th century should be equally controlled. Allow mussel loaders or single shot rifles. Every thing else should be controled. That or let any idiot store what ever weapon they choose.
sp mod Cas
-
Fortunately fissionable material is very highly regulate, although there is far too much that is unaccounted for, missing, from too many locations in the world.
However, once upon a time, and this ain't no fairy tale, there was an enterprising young man living IIRC in a suburb of Chicago, had spent far too much time collecting watches, scraping off the 'glow in the dark' material on the watch faces. When he was admitted to the local hospital extremely ill, bleeding gums, teeth and hair coming out, it was figured out that he was suffering from severe radiation poisoning. The Feds were called. Warrant obtaining, house and garage searched, a team was called in to contain the material and later admitted the lad had a nearly complete, working, bomb. A High School kid.
I agree with Simon, rights can be curtailed only through due process and the accused given the right to present arguement and or evidence to the contrary.
As a Nation founded on the principal of individuals having rights the Government can only limit those rights by following the laws already well laid out. No Shortcutting.
Unless Obummer thinks he can declare martial law.
-
The Feds were called. Warrant obtaining, house and garage searched, a team was called in to contain the material and later admitted the lad had a nearly complete, working, bomb. A High School kid.
He may have been close to a working "dirty bomb", but there is no way he would have been able to assemble a bomb that uses nuclear fission or fusion from those parts in his house.
-
I really don't remember, it was at least 40 years ago and the Feds released limited information.
-
Another questionable Cop killing of an unarmed 18 year old. Officers body cams were conveniently not working.
Why do the Cops use a gun when a tazer will do the job? The usual 'I thought he had a gun. I feared for my life', will again get them off.
Many many years ago when dash cams first came out, many police departments reported lots of vandalism, claiming 'vandals' were breaking off the antennae for the dash cam radio system so they would not work. Of course it was Officers doing the vandalization, they didn't want any record of their actions. What do you want to bet the same thing is now happening with the body cams?
-
Black Lives Matter is certainly NOT BS. This is a good metaphor:
"My personal interpretation of Black Lives Matter vs. All Lives Matter. Bob is sitting at the dinner table. Everyone else gets a plate of food except Bob. Bob says 'Bob Deserves Food.' Everyone at the table responds with 'Everyone Deserves Food' and continues eating. Although Everyone Deserves Food is a true statement, it does nothing to actually rectify the fact that BOB HAS NO FOOD!!"
Data supports that police brutality toward blacks far outweighs that towards whites. White privilege is very real, so real that most of us whites aren't even aware of it.
I feel incredibly sad for the state of our country.
Aleta
This.
I love this analogy!!!
-
The usual 'I thought he had a gun. I feared for my life', will again get them off.
The problem is the near total immunity cops enjoy.
We had a case in Framingham, MA where a cop shot a compliant subject (elderly man related to target of warrant, but completely innocent) through the neck with an AR15 while he was proned out in his home. The PD withheld the officer's' name until required by legal process; the local paper cooperated fully (rather than working sources to find the name) and the DA was using the phrase "accident for which no charges are appropriate" before the body was cold. The officer is now back on duty.
Then a while later we have a legal, licensed gun owner in the same town accidentally shoot himself in the hand. Naturally, his license is pulled, his guns seized and he is criminally charged for discharging a firearm within 500 ft of an occupied dwelling.
It's hard to have confidence in the police when it's clear they will not be held to the same standard as normal, unimportant, unconnected plebians.
Data supports that police brutality toward blacks far outweighs that towards whites. White privilege is very real, so real that most of us whites aren't even aware of it.
No doubt true. I don't think it stems from dislike for diverse people, but rather the perception (true or not) that a black male is more likely to be a safety threat than a white one. Even with policies against profiling, the difference in perception can and does result in different assumptions by police. I have been stopped by cops while armed, and the cops figured it out from the odor of gunpowder (we were coming from a match). All I got was "don't move around" (there were three of us in an SUV) and a polite "I'll need to see your carry licenses", followed by the driver getting a talking to about the moving violations he was being let off on. I absolutely, positively, do not believe we would have received that treatment if we were three black males. It probably would have been more like "out of the car mofo" at gunpoint.
-
The problem is the near total immunity cops enjoy.
We had a case in Framingham, MA where a cop shot a compliant subject (elderly man related to target of warrant, but completely innocent) through the neck with an AR15 while he was proned out in his home. The PD withheld the officer's' name until required by legal process; the local paper cooperated fully (rather than working sources to find the name) and the DA was using the phrase "accident for which no charges are appropriate" before the body was cold. The officer is now back on duty.
It's hard to have confidence in the police when it's clear they will not be held to the same standard as normal, unimportant, unconnected plebians.
The genesis of that "near total immunity" is their union. It is incredibly difficult to prosecute/discipline/fire a policeman or any "first responder". Every year (depending upon the locality), city management enters into contract negotiations with the union, and every single provision is fought over, debated and finally written into their contract, and this includes provisions for discipline and termination. And the genesis of THIS has always been the determination that the job of law enforcers/first responders essentially defines them as NOT "normal, unimportant and unconnected."
So no, they are not held to the same standard.
On a side note, the one person now waging a "War on Cops" is Donald Trump.
-
The genesis of that "near total immunity" is their union.
Only partially. The union contract cannot protect a cop from criminal charges; only from having his/her pay stopped until there is a conviction. The problem is the culture of the system being very reluctant to hold cops accountable for actions which are bad judgement, not criminal intent.
We did have a local prosecution of a Framingham cop who stole cash from the evidence room. He got convicted, did time, and lost his pension. I guess it was hard to say "just an accident for which no one should be punished" when he had the envelopes of evidence cash in his car.
-
The genesis of that "near total immunity" is their union.
Only partially. The union contract cannot protect a cop from criminal charges; only from having his/her pay stopped until there is a conviction. The problem is the culture of the system being very reluctant to hold cops accountable for actions which are bad judgement, not criminal intent.
We did have a local prosecution of a Framingham cop who stole cash from the evidence room. He got convicted, did time, and lost his pension. I guess it was hard to say "just an accident for which no one should be punished" when he had the envelopes of evidence cash in his car.
Of course the contract cannot protect a cop from criminal charges, but a lot will depend upon whether or not said cop was on-duty. If the crime involved a weapon, a cop in uniform will be treated differently than a cop who was off-duty. I'm not saying that's right, but that's the way it is, and THAT's where the union contract will provide a modicum of protection.
But city management has to walk a tightrope of sorts. First responders are city employees, and we all know that said city will be sued if they are not seen to discipline a cop appropriately, but their hands are also bound by whatever union contract they agreed to. Even roads to arbitration can be brutally negotiated. That's why cities and police unions both have teams of lawyers employed
That said, you're right. The cop culture is very real and is very insular, much in the same way that any culture is where members wear a uniform. We could be having this same conversation about soldiers.
On the other hand, it could be said that we as a society do not like accusing our men in uniform of any wrongdoing or of any lack of judgment.
Every police department is gonna have some guy running a scam.
-
I just heard an article yesterday. A man robbed a bank, and was caught before he could get away. He was taken to jail, charged, and FIRED from their local Police Force. This was just a couple of hours before his shift was to begin.
Dumb Azz. Union ain't got a leg on this one.
-
What on this earth makes you make a statement like " Donald Trump is waging a war on cops. He is pro military,pro police, to every thing I have seen. Dont know where you come up with this.
-
What on this earth makes you make a statement like " Donald Trump is waging a war on cops. He is pro military,pro police, to every thing I have seen. Dont know where you come up with this.
This thread was started way before Trump was elected and has nothing to do with him. What makes you think it does? A bit sensitive, are we? LOL!
But since you have chosen to bring Trump into this discussion, Trump does seem to be pro-military but certainly isn't pro-veteran. And he certainly isn't pro-justice the way he's undermining our intelligence community. He thinks the FBI exists to serve him instead of serving the American people.
So, we will get to have a despotic, third world style military parade. Our democracy is dead. I hope you're happy.
-
But since you have chosen to bring Trump into this discussion, Trump does seem to be pro-military but certainly isn't pro-veteran. And he certainly isn't pro-justice the way he's undermining our intelligence community. He thinks the FBI exists to serve him instead of serving the American people.
I've been wondering if this topic should have its own thread. Or does his base just not care about his attacks on the intelligence community, FBI, judges and all the other patriotic institutions he attacks? Sort of like how the religious conservatives don't have problems with his serial adultery...
-
Oh No, Moose Mom, your statement was that Trump was waging a war on cops. You posted it and brought it into this post, not me.
-
Oh No, Moose Mom, your statement was that Trump was waging a war on cops. You posted it and brought it into this post, not me.
You know what, Jean. You are right, and I am very grateful for your post because it gives me the opportunity to clarify my statement.
Donald Trump is waging a war on our Department of Justice.
Donald Trump is waging a war on our FBI.
Donald Trump is waging a war on our Department of State.
Donald Trump is waging a war on our democracy.
Donald Trump is waging a war on civil discourse.
Donald Trump is waging a war on the 99%.
Donald Trump is waging a war on immigrants.
Donald Trump is waging a war on America's place in the world.
Donald Trump is waging a war on Christians.
Donald Trump is waging a war on women.
Donald Trump is waging a war on our national security.
Donald Trump is waging a war on the media.
Donald Trump is waging a war on the NFL.
Donald Trump is waging a war on the environment.
And Donald Trump will wage war against cops when a posse of them come to pick him up for Obstruction of Justice against the United States of America.
-
So sorry MM, but, you are dead wrong. None of this crap is going any further than your dreams, and none of it is going to happen. As I have said before, time will tell.
-
I can't believe I forgot this one...
Donald Trump is also waging a war on truth.
Jean, again, you are right! Time will tell.
I have a prediction. The Democrats will win loads of seats in the midterms, but Trump won't be able to accept the results and will blame it on Russian interference. And he'll be right.
Donald Trump is also waging a war on parades. :rofl;
-
I don’t know how the Mueller investigation will end but at least some of Trumps closest advisors during the campaign have either plead guilty or have been indicted for crimes involving foreign governments, finally I know trumps family have repeatedly lied about meetings with Russian agents. He Republican Congress is going to great lengths to manufacture reasons to stop the investigation.
Why? The American people have a right to know if the Presidunce serves them or his buddy Putin.
-
Funny how it suddenly so bad that Russia tried to influence our election to further its national interests, but it's just accepted practice that the US does the same to other countries. Just look at the Obama effort to aid the opponents of Netanyahu.
It's sort of like hoe waterboarding is an "advanced interrogation technique" if done by our soldiers, but "torture" if done to our soldiers.
-
There is a difference between Obama’s effort in Israel and Russian efforts in 2016. Obama did what he did openly and within the law. The Russian efforts were clear violation of US law hacking computers is a felony and any involvement with it is also a felony.
-
Correct, but lets not forget that near the end of his term, Obama passed a whole bunch of things that we were not made aware of.
-
Correct, but lets not forget that near the end of his term, Obama passed a whole bunch of things that we were not made aware of.
Like what?
-
Correct, but lets not forget that near the end of his term, Obama passed a whole bunch of things that we were not made aware of.
Like what?
It Jean could answer that question, we would be aware of the things, thus rendering the statement false.
It's like the old paradox "This statement is false".
-
There is a difference between Obama’s effort in Israel and Russian efforts in 2016. Obama did what he did openly and within the law. The Russian efforts were clear violation of US law hacking computers is a felony and any involvement with it is also a felony.
Many of the complaints are about legal, but sleazy things - like buying ads and circulating false information on social media.
-
Many of the complaints are about legal, but sleazy things - like buying ads and circulating false information on social media.
To be fair, I used to think the same, ie, that Russian hackers were just trying to sow chaos by buying ads/circulating weird lies on social media, knowing that there was a certain part of the population that would eagerly believe anything negative about Hillary Clinton.
But yesterday, for the first time, a spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security revealed that yes, the Russians DID infiltrate voter systems in the US. So, there is every possibility that they DID change the outcome of the election. All they had to do was to change a few votes in states like Wisconsin and Michigan. First we were told that there was no evidence that the Russians hacked our voter systems, but now we know that wasn't true. Now we are being told that there is no evidence that their illegal hacking changed the outcome of the election. I now believe that is not true.
Whether or not Trump colluded with the Russians is another story, but the damage has already been done. If Clinton had won, and if there had been this same evidence that the Russians had infiltrated voters systems in this country, does anyone think that Trump and his supporters would have accepted the results? If Trump did NOT collude, he sure isn't doing much to find the truth AND to prevent it from happening again in the midterms. And Rex Tillerson has said that it is already happening.
This is war on our democracy.
-
Well, I have a list of 40 bills, etc. passed by Congress from Trump. Do you seriously want them all????
-
Well, I have a list of 40 bills, etc. passed by Congress from Trump. Do you seriously want them all????
If they are the items you said Obama passed without us being aware of them, then how about you telling us about, say, 10 of them. I'm not sure which bills passed by Congress from Trump you are referring to. I assume that Congress HAS passed bills backed by Trump. I'm not questioning that.